Skip to main content
Glama
docs-mcp-server

docs-mcp-server

list_pages

Read-only

Retrieve indexed pages for a specific library version, optionally filtering by URL text and paginating results. Use it to browse or locate documentation pages before searching or reading them.

Instructions

List the indexed pages of a library version, with an optional URL filter and pagination.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "library": "<library>"
    },
    "name": "list_pages"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum pages to return (default 50, max 200).
offsetNoNumber of pages to skip (default 0).
libraryYesLibrary name.
versionNoLibrary version (exact or X-Range, optional).
containsNoOnly list pages whose URL contains this text (e.g. '/components').

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv3.4.1

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare a safe read operation (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), so the description's safety contribution is nil. It adds no behavior the structured fields don't cover: no result ordering, no statement of what happens when 'version' is omitted (latest indexed?), and no note on pagination limits beyond what the schema states.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler and no repetition of default values. It is efficient, though its brevity comes at the cost of guidance rather than signaling a tight, complete definition.

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 five-parameter, read-only listing tool with no output schema, the definition covers the core purpose but leaves real gaps: the return shape (URLs only? titles?) is unstated, ordering is unstated, and the fallback behavior when 'version' is omitted is unstated.

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 coverage is 100%, so every parameter including the 'contains' example and limit bounds is already documented. The description merely restates that filtering and pagination exist, adding no semantics such as case sensitivity for the URL filter or how offset interacts with limit.

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 and resource: 'List the indexed pages of a library version'. The reader immediately knows this enumerates pages rather than contents or metadata, and the mention of URL filter and pagination narrows it further.

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?

Usage is only implied: enumeration of a version's page URLs. The description never says when to prefer this over content-oriented siblings such as search_docs or read_page, nor that a version must be indexed before pages exist.

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