Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
specter-skills

specter-skills

by dirtcubeinteractive
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

List items

specter_list_items
Read-only

Retrieve item IDs and slugs from a Specter project to reference when creating other game entities.

Instructions

List the items configured in this Specter project. Returns ids/slugs you can reference when creating other entities. Requires a one-time browser sign-in (specter_login).

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": "specter_list_items"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
searchNo
projectIdNoDefaults to the auto-detected project

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and open-world hints. Description adds value by stating authentication requirement (specter_login) and return type (ids/slugs), beyond annotations.

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 sentences, front-loaded with main action, no unnecessary words. Efficiently conveys core purpose and key context.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Covers purpose, return value, and prerequisite. However, lacks explanation of pagination (limit) and search behavior, which are relevant for a list tool. Adequate but not fully complete.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is low (33% with only projectId described). Description provides no parameter details, failing to compensate for undocumented limit and search parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool lists items in a Specter project and returns ids/slugs for referencing. It distinguishes from other list_* siblings by the resource type, but lacks explicit differentiation.

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?

Implies use before creating other entities via returned ids/slugs. Mentions prerequisite (specter_login), but does not specify when not to use or compare to alternatives.

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