Skip to main content
Glama
gabriel-tbc

qa-toolkit-mcp

by gabriel-tbc

qa_list_runs

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a paginated list of test runs with metadata (suite, timestamps, summary counts) from the runs directory, filtered by suite or date range.

Instructions

List available test runs from the configured runs directory.

Returns metadata only (run_id, suite, timestamps, counts) — not the full
list of test cases. Use `qa_get_run` for that.

Filters are applied in this order: suite (exact match), since, until.
Results are sorted by `started_at` ascending. Pagination via limit/offset.

Returns:
    Markdown table or JSON depending on response_format. JSON shape:
    {
        "total": int,
        "count": int,
        "offset": int,
        "has_more": bool,
        "next_offset": int | null,
        "items": [
            {"run_id": str, "suite": str, "started_at": iso8601,
             "summary": {"total","passed","failed","skipped","errors"}}
        ]
    }

Error response: string starting with "Error:".

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax runs to return.
sinceNoInclusive lower bound on started_at (ISO 8601, e.g. '2026-05-20T00:00:00Z').
suiteNoFilter by suite name (exact match). Omit to include all suites.
untilNoInclusive upper bound on started_at (ISO 8601).
offsetNoNumber of matching runs to skip.
response_formatNo'markdown' for human-readable, 'json' for programmatic.markdown

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds valuable behavioral context: returns metadata only, filter application order, sorting by started_at ascending, pagination via limit/offset, and return format options. No contradictions.

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 concise at around 200 words, well-structured into logical paragraphs: purpose, clarification, filter order, return format, error handling. Every sentence serves a purpose with no redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the presence of an output schema (JSON shape provided), the description covers input, behavior, and output completely. It distinguishes from siblings, specifies error responses, and provides all necessary context for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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%, so the schema documents all parameters. The description adds context about filter order (suite, since, until) and sorting, but does not significantly enhance meaning beyond what schema descriptions already provide. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the verb 'List' and resource 'available test runs', and specifies it returns metadata only. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool `qa_get_run`, which provides full test case details. The purpose is unambiguous and well-scoped.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit when-to-use guidance: for listing run metadata, and directs users to `qa_get_run` for full test cases. It does not explicitly mention when not to use compared to `qa_compare_runs`, but that sibling has a distinct purpose, so the guidance is sufficient.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/gabriel-tbc/qa-toolkit-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server