Skip to main content
Glama
edgegap

Edgegap MCP Server

Official
by edgegap
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

List running deployments

edgegap_list_deployments
Read-only

List active deployments with filters and sorting to find orphaned servers from earlier sessions before starting new ones, avoiding extra costs.

Instructions

List active deployments, optionally filtered and sorted. Use this to find deployments left running from earlier sessions before starting new ones — orphaned servers cost money. Filter by status, application, version, tags, request_id, created_at, fleet_name or host_name, e.g. [{field:"application",operator:"eq",value:"my-game"},{field:"status",operator:"eq",value:"ready"}]. Operators: eq and neq on every field except created_at (eq, gte, lte); in and nin with an array value on request_id, tags, application, version, fleet_name, host_name; ilike with % wildcards on fleet_name and host_name. At most one filter per field. Sort by created_at or available_session_sockets.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoDefault 50.
filtersNoOmit for all deployments.
order_byNoe.g. [{field:"created_at",order:"asc"}] for oldest first.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.2.2
    • removedInput schema / properties / filter
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Edgegap filter expression, e.g. by tag. Omit for all deployments.",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / filters
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Omit for all deployments.",
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "field": {
+        "enum": [
+          "status",
+          "request_id",
+          "tags",
+          "created_at",
+          "application",
+          "version",
+          "fleet_name",
+          "host_name"
+        ],
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "operator": {
+        "enum": [
+          "eq",
+          "neq",
+          "in",
+          "nin",
+          "gte",
+          "lte",
+          "ilike"
+        ],
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "value": {
+        "anyOf": [
+          {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          {
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          }
+        ],
+        "description": "A string, or an array of strings for in/nin. created_at is ISO 8601, e.g. \"2026-09-30T00:00:00Z\"."
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "field",
+      "operator",
+      "value"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / order_by
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "e.g. [{field:\"created_at\",order:\"asc\"}] for oldest first.",
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "field": {
+        "enum": [
+          "created_at",
+          "available_session_sockets"
+        ],
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "order": {
+        "enum": [
+          "asc",
+          "desc"
+        ],
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "field",
+      "order"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the cost consequence of orphaned deployments, the constraint that at most one filter per field is allowed, and per-field operator support that the schema does not encode.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose is front-loaded, but the body is a dense single-paragraph run-on mixing use case, field enumeration (already in the schema enum), example filter syntax, and operator rules. Bullet-style structuring of the operator matrix would make it far easier to parse.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description never characterizes what a returned deployment looks like or its key fields, which matters for a list tool. Input semantics are thoroughly covered and annotations carry the safety profile, but the return shape is an unaddressed gap.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so much of the filter syntax is already documented. However, the description adds constraint meaning the schema lacks: which operators apply to which fields (eq/neq everywhere but created_at; in/nin only on specific fields; ilike only on fleet_name/host_name) and the one-filter-per-field rule.

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 active deployments') plus scope of optional filtering and sorting. It is clearly distinguishable from edgegap_get_deployment (single) and edgegap_wait_for_deployment (blocking) without opening any schema.

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 an explicit use case with a rationale: find deployments left running from earlier sessions before starting new ones, because orphaned servers cost money. It does not name a competing sibling tool to route against (e.g. get_deployment for a single deployment), so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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