Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Fanbei

Fanbei

by ee58594
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

任务列表

fanbei_list_tasks
Read-only

List and filter translation tasks by page, scope (active, trash, all), and keyword to track document translation jobs.

Instructions

分页列出我的翻译任务（默认只看在用的）。scope 可选 active/trash/all。

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": "fanbei_list_tasks"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNo
limitNo
scopeNoactive
keywordNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare a safe read (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false), so the bar is lower, yet the description adds two genuinely useful behavioral facts: results are paginated, and by default trashed tasks are excluded from the result set. It still omits ordering and default page-size behavior, so it is not fully transparent.

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 short sentences with the pagination behavior and the default filter front-loaded, followed by the enumerated scope values. No redundant restatement of the title or the tool name.

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?

For a four-parameter, zero-required list tool with a read-only annotation and no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns conceptually (a paged list of tasks) and the default filtering. It leaves keyword-based filtering and paging limits completely undescribed, which is a meaningful gap for an agent assembling arguments.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It only clarifies scope, listing its valid values and default; page, limit, and keyword receive no explanation at all beyond their property names, and '分页' merely hints at paging without specifying limits.

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 names a specific verb and resource (列出我的翻译任务) and adds pagination as a scope qualifier, so it is clearly a list operation rather than a single-item lookup like fanbei_task_status. It does not explicitly name which sibling to use for other task operations, but the verb+resource combination is unambiguous.

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?

It states the default behavior (只看在用的) and the three available scope values (active/trash/all), which tells an agent how to reach trashed tasks. There is no explicit when-to-use-this-vs-another-tool guidance and no mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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