list_keywordsLists comment-keyword automations in the workspace, newest first, so you can verify whether a keyword already exists before creating a new one.
List the comment-keyword automations in the workspace, newest first. Use it to check whether a keyword already exists before creating one.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Page size, default 50. | |
| offset | No | ||
| search | No | Case-insensitive search in the keyword text. | |
| status | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true already establish the safety profile, so the description only needs to add context. It contributes the result ordering (newest first), which is useful, but says nothing about pagination behavior, result count limits, or what a page contains.
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?
Two short sentences, with the resource and ordering front-loaded and the usage hint immediately after. Nothing is wasted.
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?
For a listing tool with four optional filters and no output schema, the description leaves the return shape and most filter semantics unstated. It is adequate to identify the tool, but not to invoke it with confidence around paging or filtering.
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 only 50%, and the description mentions no parameters at all. The undocumented offset and status filter have no explanation anywhere, and limit/search only get one-line schema notes, so the description does not compensate for the coverage gap.
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?
States a specific verb+resource (list comment-keyword automations), the scope (workspace), and the ordering (newest first). This cleanly separates it from get_keyword (single fetch) and the create/update/delete siblings.
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?
"Use it to check whether a keyword already exists before creating one" gives a concrete trigger that points at the create_keyword workflow. It gives no explicit when-not or pagination guidance, but the primary usage context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.