nc-mcp-server

list_questions

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve all questions from a specific form, including type, text, required status, and options. Use this to inspect form structure before filling or validating responses.

Instructions

List all questions on a form (same data as get_form.questions).

Args: form_id: Numeric form id.

Returns: JSON array of questions, each with id, type, text, description, isRequired, order, options (for choice questions), and extraSettings.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`form_id`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.7.0Sep 21, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful return-shape context and the equivalence to get_form.questions, but it does not disclose auth requirements, error behavior, or ordering semantics.

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?

The summary line is front-loaded and the Args/Returns sections are compact. The Args line is somewhat redundant with the input schema, but the overall structure is clear and free of fluff.

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 simple single-parameter read-only tool with annotations covering safety, the description adequately states the operation, return fields, and relationship to get_form. It does not cover error cases or order guarantees, but these are minor for this endpoint.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate, but 'Numeric form id' merely restates the integer type from the schema. It provides no guidance on how to obtain the id, accepted ranges, or behavior for invalid ids.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('all questions on a form'), and explicitly equates it with get_form.questions. This clearly distinguishes it from singular get_question and the broader get_form tool.

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 'same data as get_form.questions' implies this can be used as a questions-only alternative to get_form, but it never explicitly states when to prefer this tool over get_form or get_question. Usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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

Deploy Server