Rephonic

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_professions

Retrieve common listener professions for filtering podcast searches. Optionally specify a query to narrow results by name.

Instructions

Returns common listener professions, optionally filtered by name. These names are used with the professions search filter.

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_professions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	No	Filter professions by name.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says 'returns' indicating a read-only operation, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether the list is cached. For a straightforward list tool, this is minimally sufficient.

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 consists of two concise sentences with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action and then provides context. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential information: what it returns, how to filter, and why to use it. Missing details like pagination or response format are not critical for this tool type. The description is complete enough given the tool's simplicity.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% (the 'query' parameter is described). The description adds context beyond the schema by noting that the returned names are used with the 'professions' search filter, which enhances understanding of the parameter's purpose. This extra context justifies a score above the baseline of 3.

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 it returns common listener professions and that these names are used with the 'professions' search filter. The verb 'returns' and specific resource 'professions' make the purpose unambiguous, and it distinguishes well from sibling tools that return other types of lists.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage when needing valid values for the professions filter, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives. For a simple list tool, this is adequate but not exceptional; no exclusions or context about sibling tools is provided.

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