Retrieve Seafile libraries visible to your account token, filtered by type (mine, shared, group, etc.) to identify available file repositories.
List libraries visible to the account token. lib_type: mine, shared, group, mine-group, public (default: all).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lib_type | No | ||
| account_token | No | ||
| session_token | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description must disclose safety and behavioral traits. It states a read-only listing action but doesn't explicitly note it performs no mutation or mention authentication requirements beyond the presence of token parameters.
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?
Single sentence with the verb and resource up front, followed by a compact enumeration of lib_type options. No filler or redundant phrases.
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?
Given three undocumented parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It lacks explanation of account_token/session_token, return structure, and any pagination or error behavior.
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?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain all parameters. It only documents lib_type values; account_token and session_token are left undefined in both schema and description, leaving the agent to guess their purpose and format.
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?
The description uses the specific verb 'List' with resource 'libraries' and clarifies scope via 'visible to the account token', distinguishing it from create/rename/get library siblings. The lib_type enumeration further specifies the kind of libraries returned.
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?
The description provides filtering values for lib_type and the default, which implies when certain sublists are wanted, but it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools like get_library_info or give conditions for when not to use this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.