Simba MCP Server

Official

by getsimba-ai

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Hybrid

List Projects

list_projects

Read-onlyIdempotent

List all available projects for filing models, including owned and team-shared folders with IDs and model counts. Use project IDs to save models.

Instructions

List the projects (the app's model folders) you can file models into.

Returns owned and team-shared projects: per project {id, name, is_default, shared_with_team_id, model_count} — team-shared folders carry "shared": true, and model_count counts SAVED models (the set the app's model list shows). Use the ids with save_model(project_id=...) and rename_project. There is deliberately no delete over the API — use the app to delete a project.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.5.0Sep 20, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "title": "list_projectsDictOutput",
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.3.2Aug 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly and idempotent, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds semantic detail: team-shared folders carry 'shared': true, and model_count counts only SAVED models (the set the app's model list shows). It also discloses an intentional API limitation (no deletion), going beyond the structured hints.

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 a compact block that front-loads the core purpose in the first line, then efficiently provides output shape, field meanings, usage pointers, and a limitation. Each sentence adds distinct information and none are redundant.

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?

For a parameterless listing tool with an output schema, the description explains the return fields and their interpretation (e.g., model_count counting SAVED models), and connects to related tools. The only remaining context lies in the output schema itself, which is provided separately, so nothing needed by an agent is missing.

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 the schema describes all parameters (none) and there is nothing for the description to add about inputs. Per the 0-param baseline, a score of 4 is appropriate; the description instead clarifies the return payload semantics.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List the projects (the app's model folders) you can file models into.' It distinguishes projects from other entities by framing them as model folders, and the return format clarifies this is a read-only list tool, separate from list_models and similar siblings.

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 states that the returned ids should be used with save_model and rename_project, giving an immediate use case. It also notes there is no delete over the API, telling agents to use the app instead. It doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling list tools, but the context is sufficient.

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

Deploy Server