eMCP for Evolution CMS

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Model List Tool

evo.model.list

Read-only

Retrieves allowlisted Evolution CMS model records with explicit field projection, supporting pagination, ordering, and limits for scoped admin content reads.

Instructions

List allowlisted Evolution CMS models with explicit allowlist projection.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "model": "<model>",
      "limit": "<limit>"
    },
    "name": "evo.model.list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	Yes
`model`	Yes
`offset`	No
`order_by`	No
`order_dir`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 10, 2026

TDQS

C2.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. Beyond that the description says nothing: not what happens when 'model' is not on the allowlist (error vs. empty result), not how pagination behaves despite a required 'limit', and not what 'projection' means for the returned objects. With no output schema, these gaps matter.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no padding, but it is under-specified rather than concise — the final clause consumes space without conveying actionable information.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a five-parameter, two-required listing tool with no output schema and zero schema descriptions, the description should clarify parameter formats and return behavior. It covers only the allowlist scoping idea, leaving the calling agent to guess at model naming, ordering, and pagination.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% across five parameters, and the description supplies no meaning for any of them. The surprising required 'limit' and an optional 'model' string with no stated format (allowlist key? model class? alias?) are left entirely unexplained.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('allowlisted Evolution CMS models'), and the singular sibling evo.model.get makes the list-vs-fetch distinction clear. The trailing phrase 'explicit allowlist projection' is jargon that does not add discernible meaning, which keeps it short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no statement of when to use this versus evo.model.get or evo.elements.list, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The only implicit cue is the word 'allowlisted', which hints at scope but is not framed as guidance.

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