Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
INFATON MCP35

INFATON MCP35

Official
by infaton
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

get_document_list

Retrieve a filtered list of documents by type, date range, and posting status to manage ERP records efficiently.

Instructions

Получить список документов заданного типа с фильтрацией по периоду и статусу проведения.

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": {
      "full_name": "<full_name>"
    },
    "name": "get_document_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoКоличество (по умолчанию 50)
date_toNoКонец периода YYYYMMDD (необязательно)
date_fromNoНачало периода YYYYMMDD (необязательно)
full_nameYesТип документа, например: Документ.ПоступлениеТоваровУслуг
posted_onlyNoТолько проведённые (по умолчанию false)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description alone must convey behaviors. It mentions filters but does not disclose pagination behavior (only max documents via 'limit' parameter implied), authentication needs, response format, or edge cases like empty results. Lacks depth.

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, concise sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. No extraneous words; front-loaded with the core action and filters.

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?

Given five parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain return structure, sorting, default behavior for omitted filters, or potential errors. A more thorough description would include these details.

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%, so the input schema already describes all parameters clearly. The tool description adds no extra semantic value beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool retrieves a list of documents filtered by type, period, and posting status. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_list' (generic) and 'get_document_movements' (movements), but could better differentiate from 'get_document_list' itself.

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 indicates when to use (get documents with filters) but does not specify when not to use or mention alternatives among siblings. No exclusion criteria or context for choosing this over 'get_list' or other tools.

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