Retrieve all views associated with a specific project by providing its ID, returning a structured list for quick review and management.
List all views for a project.
Args: project_id: ID of the project
Returns: Dictionary containing the list of views
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| project_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.4Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided; description only states 'Returns dictionary' without disclosing behavior like pagination, ordering, permissions, or side effects.
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?
Very concise, to the point, with clear sections for args and returns. No wasted words.
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?
Output schema exists, so return details are less critical. However, lacks mention of prerequisites, filtering, or limitations. Adequate for a simple list tool.
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 0%, but description adds 'ID of the project' which is helpful but minimal. Does not fully compensate for missing schema descriptions.
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?
Clearly states it lists all views for a project, specifying the resource and scope. Distinguishes from siblings like 'get_view' (single view) and 'create_view'.
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?
Implies use when all views are needed, but no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives like 'get_view' or when not to use.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.