Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

zola-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list_guests

Read-only

List wedding guest groups with RSVP status, tier, event invitations, and address coverage. Request the full view to include contact details.

Instructions

List all guest groups (households) with stats (total, invited, missing addresses). The default view carries names, ids, tier, invited/RSVP state and per-event invitations but no contact details; pass view:"full" for addresses, emails and phone numbers.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viewNoResponse shape: "compact" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; "full" returns every field this server understands. compact keeps ids, names, tier, invited/RSVP state, per-event invitations and whether an address is on file; it leaves out street addresses, emails and phone numbers. Ask for "full" only when you need contact details.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.1.4
    • addedInput schema / $schema
      Added value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • addedInput schema / properties / view
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Response shape: \"compact\" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; \"full\" returns every field this server understands. compact keeps ids, names, tier, invited/RSVP state, per-event invitations and whether an address is on file; it leaves out street addresses, emails and phone numbers. Ask for \"full\" only when you need contact details.",
+  "enum": [
+    "compact",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv1.4.2

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description is consistent with that. It adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotation: exactly which fields are included in the default compact view and what full includes. It does not discuss pagination or potential size limits, but the read-only nature and field-level detail are disclosed.

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 dense sentences with no filler. The primary behavior is front-loaded, and the conditional instruction about view:full is clearly attached to the relevant scenario. Every sentence adds value.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given one optional parameter, a rich schema description, a read-only annotation, and a read operation with no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. It covers scope, fields, and the full-view switch.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage for the single parameter, including a detailed explanation of compact vs. full response shapes. The description repeats this guidance rather than adding new semantic meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description states a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('all guest groups (households)'), and the output's scope ('with stats'). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_unseated_guests by indicating it returns all guest groups, not just unseated ones.

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 description gives clear context on when to use the compact default versus view:full, explicitly saying to pass full when contact details are needed. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or exclusions, but the guidance about when to request full details is actionable and clear.

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