Nexus MCP Server

nexus_list_templates

Browse and filter available project templates by type or tags to select the right starting point for your development project.

Instructions

List available project templates

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": "nexus_list_templates"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kind`	No	Filter by kind: UI, API, FULLSTACK
`tags`	No	Filter by tags

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jan 8, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

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. It states it's a list operation, implying read-only behavior, but doesn't mention any constraints like pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, or what 'available' means in context. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with potential behavioral nuances.

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 states the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a simple listing tool and front-loads the essential information.

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 listing tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what information is returned about templates, how results are structured, or any limitations. Given the context of multiple similar listing tools and potential filtering complexity, more completeness is needed.

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 already documents both parameters (kind and tags) with their types and basic descriptions. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, maintaining 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 action ('List') and resource ('available project templates'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'nexus_list_projects' or 'nexus_list_concepts' beyond the resource type, missing explicit sibling distinction.

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 are multiple list tools in the sibling set (e.g., nexus_list_projects, nexus_list_bugs), but no indication of when this specific listing is appropriate or what distinguishes it from other listing operations.

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