Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ragflow-kb-mcp

ragflow-kb-mcp

by feci
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

ragflow_list_commits

Read-only

Lists the commit history of a workspace folder or dataset, newest first by default, with pagination and ascending order options for reviewing document changes.

Instructions

List the commit history of a workspace folder, newest first by default.

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": "ragflow_list_commits"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
descNo
pageNoPage number, starting at 1
page_sizeNo
dataset_idNoDataset ID; resolves to the dataset's folder. Use instead of workspace_id.
workspace_idNoWorkspace = a folder in the file manager; pass its folder ID. Use dataset_id instead to address the folder that holds a dataset's files.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.1

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already establish this as a safe, closed-world read (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false). The description adds one genuine behavioral fact beyond them - default ordering is newest first - but says nothing about pagination behavior, what happens with an empty history, or how dataset-addressed folders differ from workspace-addressed ones.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

A single front-loaded clause with zero filler; the resource and the default ordering both land in the first read. It is arguably thinner than a 5-parameter paginated list tool warrants, but nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return value shape need not be explained. However, with zero required parameters and two mutually substitutable folder selectors (dataset_id vs workspace_id), the description never states what the tool does when neither is provided - the single most consequential ambiguity for an agent calling this tool.

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 60%: page, dataset_id and workspace_id are documented in the schema itself. The description contributes the ordering semantics behind the `desc` parameter ("newest first by default"), which is real added value, but says nothing about page/page_size behavior, so it neither compensates for the remaining gap nor contradicts the structured data. Baseline 3 fits.

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+resource pair ("List the commit history") and the scope ("of a workspace folder"), which is enough to separate it from ragflow_get_commit or ragflow_diff_commits at a glance. It stops short of naming which sibling to use for adjacent tasks (e.g. file-level history vs. full history tree).

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance and no alternatives named, even though the sibling set contains at least four closely competing history tools (get_commit, list_commit_files, get_commit_tree, diff_commits). The mention of "workspace folder" only implies the scoping condition; it does not say what to do when neither a workspace nor a dataset is supplied.

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