contextium-mcp-server

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_identities

List identities visible in a workspace to set voice, tone, role, and audience context for AI outputs. Filter by user or workspace scope for relevant perspectives.

Instructions

Lists identities visible to the current user in a workspace. Identities capture voice, tone, role, and audience context so AI produces work from the right perspective.

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_identities"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`scope`	No	Filter by scope: "user" for personal identities only, "workspace" for shared identities only. Omit to return all visible identities.
`workspaceId`	No	Workspace ID. If not provided, uses your default workspace.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedJul 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions visibility and workspace context but omits behavioral details such as pagination, ordering, or whether the list returns all identities at once. Basic transparency is provided but not comprehensive.

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 description is concise, with two sentences that convey purpose and context without redundancy. It is front-loaded and efficient, though slightly more structure could improve scanability.

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 list tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core context (visibility, workspace, identity definition). It is mostly complete, though adding details about return structure would improve completeness.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and both parameters are well-described in the schema. The description adds context about identities but does not enhance parameter meaning beyond what the schema offers. 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 clearly states the action ('lists identities'), the scope ('visible to the current user in a workspace'), and provides a helpful definition of identities. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_identity (single identity) or create_identity.

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 description implies usage context (listing visible identities) but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_identity or other list tools. No exclusion criteria or when-not-to-use advice is given.

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

Deploy Server