mcp-kaneo

list_projects

Retrieve all projects within a specific workspace to gain a complete view for managing tasks and projects in Kaneo.

Instructions

List all projects in a workspace

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": {
      "workspaceId": "<workspaceId>"
    },
    "name": "list_projects"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`workspaceId`	Yes	Workspace ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Sep 6, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read-only listing operation by using 'List,' but it adds little beyond the tool name: no mention of authentication needs, pagination, return format, or filtering behavior. The only new behavioral context is the workspace scoping.

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?

The description is a single, focused sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the action and scope. For a tool with one parameter, this level of brevity is appropriate and efficient.

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?

The tool is simple, the schema covers the only parameter, and the description states the core purpose. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the description does not disclose return shape, pagination, or access requirements. It is minimally adequate but leaves several practical details unspecified for an autonomous agent.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the workspaceId parameter already has a description in the schema. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level detail. Given the high schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'List all projects in a workspace.' It conveys the operation and scope without ambiguity. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling list tools like list_tasks or list_workspaces, but the resource name makes the target clear.

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?

The phrase 'in a workspace' implies the tool should be used when a workspace context and project listing are needed. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as list_tasks or list_columns, and no exclusions or prerequisites are described beyond the required workspaceId.

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

Deploy Server