Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
competlab-mcp-server

competlab-mcp-server

by competlab
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list_projects

Read-only

Discover accessible projects with status, competitor count, and last monitored timestamp. Use it to find projectId values required by other competitive intelligence tools.

Instructions

List all accessible projects with status, competitor count, and last monitored timestamp. This is the starting point — use it to discover available projectId values for other tools.

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_projects"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that only 'accessible' projects are returned and what fields come back, but says nothing about pagination, ordering, or result-size limits.

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 tight sentences: the capability statement first, the routing guidance second. No filler or repetition.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so by naming the fields returned (status, competitor count, last monitored timestamp). Combined with the discovery role, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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 baseline is 4. The phrase 'all accessible projects' correctly signals there is no filtering input, matching the empty schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (list all accessible projects) and enumerates the returned fields: status, competitor count, last monitored timestamp. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_competitors, list_tickets, or get_project.

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?

Explicitly frames the tool as the entry point and states its purpose: discovering projectId values for other tools. This is strong routing guidance, though it does not name a specific alternative or a when-not condition.

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