Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Vigilo MCP Server

Vigilo MCP Server

by fredrsat
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

list_children

Retrieve the children linked to the signed-in parent account, returning each child's ID and details needed to view messages, timetables, absences, and consent forms.

Instructions

List barna knyttet til den innloggede foresatte, med childId.

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": "list_children"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It does not disclose read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or output format, though the output schema exists and may cover return values. The mention of 'logged-in' implies an auth context but is not a behavioral disclosure.

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?

The description is a single, short sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It is concise, though the mixed language (Norwegian/English) may reduce clarity for some agents.

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?

Given that there are no parameters and an output schema exists, the description may be sufficient for calling the tool. However, without annotations, it lacks any behavioral context such as safety or auth requirements, leaving some gaps for an agent to infer.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are not applicable. The description still mentions childId as a returned field, which is a minor addition. Baseline 4 is appropriate for a zero-param tool.

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 states a specific verb and resource: listing children associated with the logged-in guardian, and mentions the childId. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling web_list_children, which appears to be a near-duplicate, but the purpose itself is clear.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus the similar web_list_children sibling. The description implies a context (logged-in guardian) but provides no exclusions or alternative selection criteria.

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