edi-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List a package's data entities

edi_list_entities

Read-onlyIdempotent

List every data entity in one package revision with file details, columns, checksums, and URLs so you can choose an entityId to preview or download.

Instructions

Every data entity (table or file) of one package revision: name, type, file name, format, byte size, record count, CSV layout and the columns with definitions, storage types, units, date formats, code lists and missing-value codes; optional SHA-1 checksums. Gives the PASTA data URL and a DataONE URL readable without a key. Next: call edi_preview_entity or edi_download_entities with an entityId.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Entities per page (1-200).
`entity`	No	Only this entity: its id, name or file name (case-insensitive).
`offset`	No	Index of the first entity (paging).
`package`	Yes	A package: knb-lter-hbr.14.22, knb-lter-hbr.14 (newest unless revision is set), a DOI, or a portal or PASTA URL; the scope may be a site code or name (jrn.210548103).
`revision`	No	Revision when package names none: a number, 'newest' (default) or 'oldest'.
`include_checksums`	No	Fetch missing SHA-1 checksums (one request per entity, at most 25).
`include_attributes`	No	Return each entity's columns (definitions, units, codes).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page`	Yes
`notes`	No
`source`	No
`entities`	Yes
`resolved`	No
`nextSteps`	No
`packageId`	Yes
`revisionFrom`	Yes
`attributesElided`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 19, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior, and the description adds useful context such as the PASTA/DataONE URLs and the optional SHA-1 checksum behavior. It could say more about pagination or authentication, but it adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core operation and remains dense but purposeful; the final sentence routes to next tools. It is somewhat overpacked with return-field details, but nothing is clearly wasteful.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the output schema and annotations, the description provides enough context to call the tool correctly and know what to do next. It covers the package-revision scope, returned entity details, checksum option, URLs, and follow-up tools.

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 input schema already documents all seven parameters thoroughly. The description does not add substantive parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema provides, which is appropriate but not exceptional.

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 that this tool lists every data entity in one package revision and enumerates the returned fields, making the resource and scope specific. It does not explicitly name sibling tools such as edi_get_package or edi_get_metadata, so sibling differentiation is implied rather than stated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives clear next-step guidance: call edi_preview_entity or edi_download_entities with an entityId. It does not explicitly say when to choose this over sibling package/metadata tools, but the intended usage context is clear.

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

Deploy Server