Skip to main content
Glama

List Property Values

vault_list_property_values
Read-onlyIdempotent

Discover a property's distinct values with note counts before filtering. Unpacks array properties and sorts by frequency to reveal the most common values.

Instructions

List distinct values for a specific property key with note counts. Useful for discovering the range of values a property takes before searching.

Example: vault_list_property_values({ key: "status" }) returns [{ value: "active", count: 47 }, { value: "done", count: 211 }, ...]

When to use: Enumerating possible values for a property key before calling vault_search_by_property. Handles both scalar properties (status: "active") and array properties (tags: ["a", "b"]) — array elements are unpacked and counted individually, so the sum of counts may exceed the note count. An unknown key or empty folder returns an empty array, not an error. Call vault_list_property_keys first to discover valid key names.

Parameters:

  • key is case-sensitive and must match exactly as returned by vault_list_property_keys. Values are always strings — numeric and boolean properties are stringified for counting.

  • folder + key interact: folder restricts counting to a subtree, so the same key can return different value distributions depending on folder scope.

  • limit (default 50) applies after sorting by count descending, so you always get the most-used values first. Increase for high-cardinality keys like "title" or "created".

Returns: JSON array of { value, count } sorted by count descending.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYesProperty key name — use vault_list_property_keys to discover valid keys (e.g. "status", "type", "tags").
limitNoMax values to return (default 50). Increase for high-cardinality properties.
folderNoRestrict to a folder prefix (e.g. "Projects")
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description adds significant behavioral details beyond the annotations (which only note readOnly and idempotent). It explains how array properties are unpacked, that counts may exceed note count, that unknown keys return empty array (not error), that values are stringified, and the sorting order. This fully informs the agent of the tool's behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured: starts with a clear purpose, includes an example, then 'When to use' paragraph, parameter details, and return format. Every sentence adds value; no waste. Front-loaded with key information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given three parameters, no output schema, and good annotations, the description covers all necessary aspects: usage context, parameter interactions, edge cases, return format, sorting, and data type handling. It is fully complete for the agent to use effectively.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context: key is case-sensitive and must match exactly, folder restricts subtree and interacts with key, limit applies after sorting and is suitable for high-cardinality properties. These details go beyond the schema's simple descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb ('List distinct values'), the resource ('property key'), and the additional context ('with note counts'). It provides an example and distinguishes from siblings like vault_search_by_property and vault_list_property_keys by explicitly stating its use case: enumerating values before searching.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly states when to use (before vault_search_by_property) and advises running vault_list_property_keys first. It covers parameter interactions (folder, key) and edge cases (unknown key, array properties). However, it does not provide an explicit list of when not to use it or compare it directly to other search tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/aliasunder/vault-cortex'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server