biz.dfch.SpecMgr

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List requirements

list_req

Lists requirement IDs, titles, statuses, and refs from the configured base directory, one page at a time, with optional glob, paging, and language filters for context before fetching by ID.

Instructions

Ids, titles, statuses, and refs of requirements in the configured requirement base directory, one page at a time, for context before addressing one by id. 'ref' is an opaque, extensionless identifier -- not a filename to read from disk -- for documents that have no assigned id; use it with the get_req tool instead. An optional glob pattern (e.g. 'dead*') filters the listing to the requirements whose id matches it, case-insensitively; glob=None (the default) lists everything, and an empty string matches nothing. max_results/offset control paging (default page size 25, capped at 100); out-of-range values are clamped, not errored. The optional language parameter (default 'en') selects the directory scanned: omitted/'en' = the flat docs/req/ directory (the default behavior, unchanged); any other ISO 639-1-shaped lowercase two-letter code (e.g. 'de') = only that language's docs/req/{language}/ subdirectory, listing exactly the existing variants of that language (there is deliberately no 'all languages' mode). The language is shape-validated before any file access (an invalid-shaped value is a ValueError, like an invalid id), and a shape-valid language without a packaged heading-mapping table is rejected up front with an actionable ValueError.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`glob`	No
`offset`	No
`language`	No	en
`max_results`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`total`	Yes
`offset`	Yes
`results`	Yes
`truncated`	Yes
`error_count`	No
`max_results`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.38.0Nov 2, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / language

Added value: +{
+  "default": "en",
+  "title": "Language",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedv0.36.0Oct 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so: paging defaults (25, capped at 100), clamping rather than erroring, glob case-insensitivity and the None vs empty-string distinction, language directory behavior with no 'all languages' mode, and two distinct ValueError conditions with validation ordering.

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?

Front-loaded with the useful core (what is returned, paging) before the ref/language caveats. Dense but tightly packed into a few long sentences; the language sentence in particular could be split or trimmed without losing information.

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?

Output schema exists, so return shape need not be described. For a 4-parameter read tool with error-prone glob and language options, the definition covers defaults, edge cases, error behavior, and cross-tool handoff completely.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, yet every parameter is given meaning beyond its name: glob semantics and examples, max_results/offset paging and clamping, and language selecting docs/req/ vs docs/req/{language}/ with shape validation and heading-table rejection.

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 ('Ids, titles, statuses, and refs of requirements'), names the base directory, and immediately separates itself from get_req by explaining that 'ref' is an identifier for use with that tool rather than something to read.

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?

Gives clear context ('for context before addressing one by id') and routes the ref case to get_req. It does not explicitly compare itself against sibling list_* tools or say when to prefer parse_req, but the resource scope is unambiguous.

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

Deploy Server