Skip to main content
Glama
huiseo

Outline Wiki MCP Server

by huiseo

list_trash

Retrieve deleted documents from Outline wiki trash to review or restore them. Specify a limit to control how many items appear in the results.

Instructions

Get list of documents in trash.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the 'list_trash' tool. It calls the Outline API '/documents.deleted' endpoint to fetch deleted documents and formats the response using formatTrashDocuments.
    async list_trash(args: ListTrashInput) {
      const { data } = await apiCall(() =>
        apiClient.post<OutlineDocument[]>('/documents.deleted', { limit: args.limit })
      );
      return formatTrashDocuments(data || []);
    },
  • Zod input schema definition for the list_trash tool, defining an optional 'limit' parameter defaulting to 25.
    export const listTrashSchema = z.object({ limit: limit.default(25) });
  • Registration of the listTrashSchema under the 'list_trash' key in the central toolSchemas map, used to generate tool definitions.
    list_trash: listTrashSchema,
  • Tool definition creation for 'list_trash' in the allTools array, converting the Zod schema to JSON Schema for MCP protocol.
      'list_trash',
      'Get list of documents in trash.',
      'list_trash'
    ),
  • TypeScript type definition for ListTrashInput inferred from listTrashSchema.
    export type ListTrashInput = z.infer<typeof listTrashSchema>;
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Get list' implies a read-only operation, it doesn't specify whether this requires special permissions, what format the results come in, whether there's pagination, or if the operation has any side effects. The description is too minimal for a tool that presumably accesses sensitive deleted content.

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 extremely concise at just one sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and uses straightforward language. Every word earns its place in this minimal description.

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?

For a tool that accesses trash/deleted documents with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what information is returned about each document, whether the operation is safe/reversible, or how results are structured. The context demands more disclosure for a tool dealing with potentially sensitive deleted content.

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 description mentions no parameters at all, while the schema has one parameter (limit) with 0% description coverage. Since schema_description_coverage is 0%, the description should compensate but doesn't. The baseline would be lower, but the tool has only one optional parameter, making the gap less severe than for multi-parameter tools.

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 'Get' and resource 'list of documents in trash', making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_archived_documents' or 'list_recent_documents', which would require mentioning the specific trash context more explicitly.

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. There's no mention of when to choose list_trash over other listing tools like list_archived_documents or list_recent_documents, nor does it specify prerequisites or constraints for accessing trash content.

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/huiseo/outline-smart-mcp'

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