Skip to main content
Glama

list_all_projects

Retrieve all public WebSim projects with pagination controls to browse and explore available content in the community.

Instructions

List all public WebSim projects with pagination

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoNumber of projects to return (default: 20)
offsetNoNumber of projects to skip (default: 0)

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the list_all_projects MCP tool. It extracts limit and offset from arguments, calls the API client's listAllProjects method, and returns a formatted JSON response with the results.
    handler: async (args) => {
      const { limit = 20, offset = 0 } = args;
      const result = await apiClient.listAllProjects(limit, offset);
      return {
        content: [{
          type: "text",
          text: JSON.stringify({
            success: true,
            data: result,
            message: `Successfully retrieved ${result.items?.length || 0} projects (offset: ${offset})`
          }, null, 2)
        }]
      };
    }
  • Zod input schema validation is not directly used here, but the JSON schema defines optional limit (default 20) and offset (default 0) parameters for paginating project lists.
    inputSchema: {
      type: "object",
      properties: {
        limit: {
          type: "number",
          description: "Number of projects to return (default: 20)",
          default: 20
        },
        offset: {
          type: "number",
          description: "Number of projects to skip (default: 0)",
          default: 0
        }
      }
    },
  • server.js:299-331 (registration)
    The complete tool registration object added to the tools array, which is used by the MCP server to handle list_all_projects tool calls.
    {
      name: "list_all_projects",
      description: "List all public WebSim projects with pagination",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          limit: {
            type: "number",
            description: "Number of projects to return (default: 20)",
            default: 20
          },
          offset: {
            type: "number",
            description: "Number of projects to skip (default: 0)",
            default: 0
          }
        }
      },
      handler: async (args) => {
        const { limit = 20, offset = 0 } = args;
        const result = await apiClient.listAllProjects(limit, offset);
        return {
          content: [{
            type: "text",
            text: JSON.stringify({
              success: true,
              data: result,
              message: `Successfully retrieved ${result.items?.length || 0} projects (offset: ${offset})`
            }, null, 2)
          }]
        };
      }
    },
  • Helper method in WebSimAPIClient class that makes the HTTP request to fetch paginated list of all public projects from the WebSim API.
    async listAllProjects(limit = 20, offset = 0) {
      const params = new URLSearchParams({ limit: limit.toString(), offset: offset.toString() });
      return this.makeRequest(`/api/v1/projects?${params}`);
    }
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'pagination' (via limit/offset parameters) and specifies 'public' projects, which adds useful context about scope and data access. However, it does not cover other behavioral aspects like rate limits, authentication needs, or error handling.

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 single, efficient sentence that front-loads key information ('List all public WebSim projects with pagination') without unnecessary details. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's low complexity (2 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the core action and pagination but lacks details on return values, error cases, or integration with sibling tools, leaving gaps for an AI agent to infer usage.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, fully documenting the 'limit' and 'offset' parameters with defaults. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as format details or constraints, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 action ('List all') and resource ('public WebSim projects'), making the purpose understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'list_user_projects' or 'get_project_by_id', which would require mentioning scope limitations or alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'list_user_projects' for user-specific projects or 'search_feed' for filtered results. It lacks explicit when/when-not instructions or prerequisite contexts.

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/gigachadtrey/websimm'

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