Gantry

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_onboardings

Read-only

Retrieves onboarding records from Gantry so agents can review versioned robotics development state and execution context before making changes.

Instructions

list onboardings

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": {
      "arguments": "<arguments>"
    },
    "name": "list_onboardings"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`arguments`	Yes
`idempotency_key`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.4.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

D1.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered, but the description adds nothing beyond that. It says nothing about pagination behavior despite an 'after' cursor parameter, nor about result ordering or volume.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

Two words contain no wasted phrasing, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. There is nothing front-loaded because there is nothing substantive to load.

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?

With nested parameters, zero schema documentation, and no output schema, the description needed to explain the filter objects and cursor semantics. It does neither, so an agent cannot reliably invoke the tool beyond the no-argument case.

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% and the schema has nested objects ('basis', 'intent') plus an 'after' cursor and an idempotency_key, all completely undocumented. The description provides no meaning for any parameter, leaving the agent unable to construct a correct call.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"list onboardings" restates the tool name with no added specificity: no scope, no filter semantics, no statement of what an onboarding is. The sibling set includes get_onboarding for the singular fetch, yet the description never distinguishes listing from fetching.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer get_onboarding or list_crew_setups/list_development_states instead, and no exclusions. Usage is only inferable from the verb 'list'.

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