list_platformsRetrieve every supported platform with its available operations, costs, and accepted parameters; optionally filter by platform to inspect one integration.
Every platform apinoa serves, its operations, what each costs, and the parameters each operation accepts. Free, and needs no key.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| platform | No | Only this platform's details. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description provides crucial, non-structural behavioral constraints: it is 'Free' and requires 'no key'. This significantly aids an agent by defining its operational cost and authentication requirements.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description packs a large amount of high-value information (scope, content, cost, authentication) into a single sentence without becoming overly verbose or tangential.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a discovery tool that lists broad, foundational data (platforms), providing the scope, contents (operations, costs), and access requirements (free/no key) makes it contextually complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, meaning the parameter 'platform' is fully detailed in the schema. The description does not add substantial meaning beyond what the input schema already provides, maintaining the baseline score.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the primary goal is to list every platform apinoa serves and details related to its operations. It distinguishes itself as a broad discovery tool among the available search and get-product siblings.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage is implied for discovery (e.g., before using a specific API call), but the description does not explicitly state 'when' to use it versus other listing tools, offering only an implicit use case.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.