Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Kafka Schema Reg

MCP Kafka Schema Reg

by aywengo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

List Registries

list_registries
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists all configured Schema Registry instances so you can inspect available registries; for performance, prefer the registry://names resource.

Instructions

List all configured Schema Registry instances.

NOTE: This tool is maintained for backward compatibility. Consider using the 'registry://names' resource instead for better performance.

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_registries"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.2.2
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered and the description only needs to add context beyond that. It does: it discloses deprecation/backward-compatibility status and a performance disadvantage relative to a resource alternative, which materially affects tool selection. It does not describe the shape of the returned list (e.g., names vs. full registry objects), but the gaps are minor for a zero-parameter read.

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?

Two sentences, both load-bearing: the first states purpose, the second states deprecation and the migration path. Purpose is front-loaded ahead of the caveat, which is the correct ordering for a reader scanning tool lists.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a zero-parameter, read-only, no-output-schema tool, the description covers what it does, its status, and where to go instead. The only thing an agent might still want is what a returned entry contains, but that is a small residual gap given the tool's simplicity and its deprecation notice.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the schema is trivially complete and the description needs to add no parameter meaning. Baseline applies; there is no parameter-related omission to penalize.

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 configured Schema Registry instances" gives a specific verb (list) and a specific resource (Schema Registry instances), which distinguishes it from sibling listers such as list_contexts, list_subjects, and list_workflows that operate on narrower resources. The scope word "all configured" makes the breadth explicit. It stops short of naming an adjacent alternative in tool form, so it lands just under the top mark.

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 note states this tool is kept only for backward compatibility and directs callers to the 'registry://names' resource for better performance, which is real routing guidance rather than implied usage. What it lacks is an explicit statement of when the tool is still the right choice (e.g., older clients that cannot read resources), leaving that boundary to inference.

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