Skip to main content
Glama
amanharshx

ultralytics-mcp

by amanharshx
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

projects_list

Read-only

Lists computer-vision projects in your Ultralytics workspace. Filter by owner and set result limits to browse your projects.

Instructions

List computer-vision projects in your Ultralytics workspace.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum projects to return. Omit for the server default (currently 20); the API currently accepts up to 500.
ownerNoWorkspace owner; defaults to the account owner. Takes precedence over username when both are given.
usernameNoCompatibility alias for owner.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.15
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Maximum projects to return. Omit for the server default (currently 20); the API currently accepts up to 500.",
+  "type": "number"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.13
    • addedInput schema / properties / owner / description
      Added value: +"Workspace owner; defaults to the account owner. Takes precedence over username when both are given."
    • addedInput schema / properties / username / description
      Added value: +"Compatibility alias for owner."
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.12
    • addedInput schema / properties / owner
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
  4. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds only the workspace scoping context and nothing about pagination or default result size, leaving the behavioral burden mostly unmet for a tool whose output size is variable.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

A single efficient sentence with the resource front-loaded and no filler. It is appropriately sized, though it is essentially the minimum rather than a model of structure.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a read-only list tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is barely adequate: it omits result ordering, pagination expectations, and how it differs from explore_projects. The gap is minor but real given several look-alike siblings.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so limit, owner and username are fully documented in the schema including defaults and precedence. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb+resource ('List computer-vision projects') with a scope qualifier ('in your Ultralytics workspace'). It does not differentiate from siblings like explore_projects or projects_get, so the agent must infer the distinction.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as explore_projects or projects_get. The explicit 'list all projects' framing is only implied by the verb.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools