Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
docs-mcp-server

docs-mcp-server

by arabold
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

list_jobs

Read-only

Retrieve all documentation indexing jobs and optionally filter them by queued, running, completed, failed, cancelling, or cancelled status to monitor progress and troubleshoot failures.

Instructions

List all indexing jobs. Optionally filter by status.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_jobs"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusNoFilter jobs by status (optional).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv3.4.1

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the scope (all jobs) and the optional filter, but says nothing about ordering, pagination/limits, or whether results are truncated, which an agent would want to know before relying on a complete list.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, with zero filler. The second sentence largely restates what the schema already declares, which keeps it just below maximum.

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 trivial zero-required-parameter list tool with full schema coverage, the essential purpose is covered. However, with no output schema, the description could have noted that results include job IDs/status used by get_job_info and cancel_job, and could have mentioned ordering or result limits.

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% and the single parameter is enumerated, so the schema fully documents the filter values. The description echoes the same fact ("filter by status") without adding semantics such as whether multiple statuses can be combined or what happens with no filter.

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?

"List all indexing jobs" gives a specific verb and resource, and "all" implicitly contrasts with the single-job sibling get_job_info. It does not explicitly name or differentiate against any sibling, so it stops short of the top score.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The phrase "Optionally filter by status" implies the common usage path (no filter = everything, filter = narrowed), but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of reaching for get_job_info or cancel_job after obtaining job IDs, and no exclusions.

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