List all available MCP resources with their descriptions to see what data and services are accessible.
List all available MCP resources with their descriptions
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": "list-resources"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the scope of listing 'all available' and that descriptions are included, which is useful. However, it does not mention any potential side effects, error conditions, or output format details. For a simple read-only list operation, this is minimally adequate.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence that exactly states the purpose. It is concise, front-loaded with the verb, and contains no filler or redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's low complexity and empty input schema, the description is quite complete. It conveys what the tool returns (list of resources with descriptions) and the scope (all available). The absence of an output schema is compensated by this clear statement. A small gap is the lack of usage guidance, but that is minor for such a straightforward tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters, so the schema is empty and there is nothing to describe. Based on the rule, 0 params gets a baseline of 4. The description adds no parameter info because none exist.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb 'List', a specific resource 'MCP resources', and scope 'all available'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools which focus on posts, users, feeds, etc., while this tool targets the server's resources.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. There are no exclusions or alternative mentions. The context is only implicit, but no explicit usage guidance is given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.