Apache Zeppelin MCP Server

list_notebooks

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve notebooks from an Apache Zeppelin server, using a case-insensitive name filter to narrow large collections and a limit to control results.

Instructions

List notebooks on the Zeppelin server.

Always use name_filter to narrow results — the server may have thousands of notebooks.

Args:
    name_filter: Optional substring filter (case-insensitive) matched against the full path.
    limit: Maximum number of notebooks to return (default 100, 0 = unlimited).

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`name_filter`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.4.1Oct 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful operational context about volume and filtering, but does not go beyond that in behavioral detail.

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 short, front-loaded, and structured with a compact Args section. Every sentence adds useful information without waste.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The tool is simple, annotations cover safety, an output schema exists, and parameter behavior is well described. The main contextual gap is the lack of guidance distinguishing this tool from the sibling search_notebooks.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description fully documents both parameters: name_filter is a case-insensitive substring match against the full path, and limit defaults to 100 with 0 meaning unlimited. This adds substantial meaning beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the verb and resource: list notebooks on the Zeppelin server. It does not differentiate the tool from the sibling search_notebooks, which is a meaningful omission for selection.

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?

It gives clear usage context: always use name_filter because the server may have thousands of notebooks. It does not explicitly say when to use this instead of search_notebooks or other alternatives.

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