Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
DocuSky MCP

DocuSky MCP

by hcyuser
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

list_databases

List public, personal, or friend-shared DocuSky databases to find collections for full-text search.

Instructions

List DocuSky databases available to this server.

Args: target: "OPEN" for public databases, "USER" for the logged-in account's own. include_friend_db: Also list databases shared by DocuSky "friends" (USER only).

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_databases"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetNoOPEN
include_friend_dbNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It conveys read-only listing semantics and hints at authentication via 'logged-in account', but does not state permission requirements, friend-sharing implications, or result limits. Partial disclosure only.

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?

Front-loaded one-line purpose followed by tight per-argument notes; no filler. The 'Args:' block is compact and each line 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?

With only two optional parameters, an output schema covering return values, and explicit parameter meanings, an agent has what it needs to invoke the tool. Minor gaps in auth/permission context remain but are low-impact.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: it explains the meaning of both the 'target' enum-like values ('OPEN' vs 'USER') and the 'include_friend_db' flag including its USER-only constraint. This is meaningfully beyond the bare schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List DocuSky databases available to this server') with a clear scope. It is distinguishable from the closest sibling list_corpora by naming a different resource type, though it does not explicitly contrast against it.

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?

It implies when to use each mode by explaining that target='OPEN' yields public databases and 'USER' yields the account's own, which is useful selection guidance. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives or prerequisites beyond that.

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