Skip to main content
Glama

list_user_projects

Retrieve all projects created by a specific user in WebSim, with options to limit results and paginate through the list.

Instructions

List all projects for a specific user

Input Schema

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

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the tool logic: parses arguments using UserParamsSchema, calls the API client's listUserProjects method, and returns formatted JSON response as MCP content.
    handler: async (args) => {
      const { user, limit = 20, offset = 0 } = UserParamsSchema.parse(args);
      const result = await apiClient.listUserProjects(user, limit, offset);
      return {
        content: [{
          type: "text",
          text: JSON.stringify({
            success: true,
            data: result,
            message: `Successfully retrieved ${result.items?.length || 0} projects for user ${user}`
          }, null, 2)
        }]
      };
    }
  • JSON Schema defining the input parameters for the list_user_projects tool, including user (required), limit, and offset.
    inputSchema: {
      type: "object",
      properties: {
        user: {
          type: "string",
          description: "Username"
        },
        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
        }
      },
      required: ["user"]
    },
  • server.js:332-369 (registration)
    The complete tool registration object for 'list_user_projects' added to the tools array used by the MCP server for listing and calling tools.
    {
      name: "list_user_projects",
      description: "List all projects for a specific user",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          user: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Username"
          },
          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
          }
        },
        required: ["user"]
      },
      handler: async (args) => {
        const { user, limit = 20, offset = 0 } = UserParamsSchema.parse(args);
        const result = await apiClient.listUserProjects(user, limit, offset);
        return {
          content: [{
            type: "text",
            text: JSON.stringify({
              success: true,
              data: result,
              message: `Successfully retrieved ${result.items?.length || 0} projects for user ${user}`
            }, null, 2)
          }]
        };
      }
    },
  • Helper method in WebSimAPIClient that makes the HTTP request to fetch a user's projects from the WebSim API.
    async listUserProjects(user, limit = 20, offset = 0) {
      const params = new URLSearchParams({ limit: limit.toString(), offset: offset.toString() });
      return this.makeRequest(`/api/v1/users/${user}/projects?${params}`);
    }
  • Zod schema used in the tool handler for validating the 'user' input parameter.
    const UserParamsSchema = z.object({
      user: z.string().describe('Username')
    });
Behavior2/5

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 only states the basic action without mentioning permissions, rate limits, pagination behavior (implied by limit/offset but not explained), or response format. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with parameters.

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 with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral aspects like permissions, rate limits, or response structure, which are important for a tool that lists user-specific data with pagination parameters.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all parameters (user, limit, offset). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, resulting in the baseline score 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 verb ('List') and resource ('projects for a specific user'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'list_all_projects' or 'get_project_by_id', which would require explicit differentiation for a perfect score.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention when to choose 'list_user_projects' over 'list_all_projects' or 'get_project_by_id', nor does it specify prerequisites or exclusions.

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