cloudflare-mcp-pro

kv_list_keys

Read-only

List keys in a Cloudflare KV namespace with optional prefix filtering. Retrieve up to 1000 keys per request to manage stored data.

Instructions

List keys in a KV namespace, optionally filtered by prefix.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "namespace_id": "<namespace_id>"
    },
    "name": "kv_list_keys"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`account_id`	No	Cloudflare account ID. Falls back to CLOUDFLARE_ACCOUNT_ID env var when omitted.
`namespace_id`	Yes	KV namespace ID.
`prefix`	No	Filter keys by prefix.
`limit`	No	Max keys (default 1000).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0Jun 22, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating safe read and potential variability. The description adds only the prefix filter detail, but lacks disclosure of pagination, limit behavior, or response format. Minimal addition beyond annotations.

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?

Extremely concise: one sentence capturing the core action and optional filter. Front-loaded and no wasted words.

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?

No output schema provided; description does not explain return format (e.g., list of key names). Relies on the schema for parameter details. Adequate for a simple list operation but leaves gaps in what the agent should expect as output.

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 coverage is 100% with all parameters described. The description restates the prefix filter but does not add new meaning beyond schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema carries the burden.

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?

Description clearly states 'List keys in a KV namespace, optionally filtered by prefix.' It specifies the resource (KV namespace) and action (list keys) with an optional filter. Although it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like kv_get or kv_delete, the purpose is unambiguous.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., kv_get for single key retrieval, kv_delete for deletion). There is no mention of prerequisites or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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

Deploy Server