Skip to main content
Glama
getsimba-ai

Simba MCP Server

Official
by getsimba-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

List Study Recipes

list_study_recipes
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get study recipes with revision summaries and optional expanded details for effective priors, inspection state, or specification. Use limit/cursor for paging.

Instructions

List recipes with their revisions as summaries (id, number, content_hash, reason, created_at). Heavy fields travel only by name in expand: effective (exact frozen priors, settings, data hashes and runtime), inspection (which settings were authored vs defaulted, inert prior fields with their gate, engine state current/stale that predicts whether launch will be refused, and lineage: the recorded dataset with available checked for you and the display line people see; treat inert values as stored-but-unused, not as recipe errors), specification (the authored request). Prefer get_recipe_revision for one revision in full. Raw datasets are never included. Paging is opt-in: pass limit (1-200) to receive a page and next_cursor; send that cursor back unchanged for the next page; null next_cursor means the end. Without limit every row is returned. Rows you cannot see are simply absent; no totals are promised.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
cursorNo
expandNo
study_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.6.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / cursor
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Cursor"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / expand
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "items": {
+        "enum": [
+          "effective",
+          "inspection",
+          "specification"
+        ],
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Expand"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Limit"
+}
  2. Addedv0.5.0

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover only the safety profile (readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive), and the description adds substantially more: raw datasets are never included, invisible rows are simply absent with no promised totals, cursor must be sent back unchanged, null next_cursor signals the end, and inert prior fields mean stored-but-unused rather than errors. It even flags that engine state predicts whether launch will be refused.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and every clause carries information, but the inspection parenthetical is very long and dense, making the middle hard to scan. It earns its length with content, yet some sub-clauses (e.g. 'the display line people see') could be trimmed without loss.

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 filtered, expandable list tool with an output schema already present, the description covers the remaining unknowns an agent needs: which fields are summaries, what expand adds, dataset exclusion, paging protocol, and absence semantics. Nothing required to call it correctly is missing.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden and does so: limit is bounded (1-200) and returns a page with next_cursor, cursor is a verbatim round-trip token, and each expand enum value is defined in domain terms (effective, inspection, specification). This is meaning well beyond the bare enum list in the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List recipes with their revisions as summaries') and immediately fixes the shape of what is returned (id, number, content_hash, reason, created_at). It also explicitly routes the agent away from itself toward get_recipe_revision for single-revision reads, so it is distinguishable from siblings without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Names the alternative ('Prefer get_recipe_revision for one revision in full') and the condition that selects it, and gives the condition for each expand value. It also discloses the optional nature of paging ('Paging is opt-in') so the agent knows that omitting limit is a valid, non-error path.

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