Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Agentic CMS

Agentic CMS

by intellieffect
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list_gallery_media

Retrieve all gallery media rows for a specific item, sorted by sort_order ascending. Use this to read or verify media attached to an item before editing or publishing.

Instructions

List gallery_item_media rows for an item, ordered by sort_order asc.

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": {
      "item_id": "<item_id>"
    },
    "name": "list_gallery_media"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
item_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the ordering guarantee ('ordered by sort_order asc') and implies a read-only listing, but says nothing about permissions, pagination, or behavior when an item has no media attached.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and ordering are stated up front. It earns its space, though the jargon 'gallery_item_media rows' leans on internal naming rather than user-facing language.

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?

For a simple 1-param read tool with no output schema, the definition is minimally sufficient, but the crowded sibling set (attach/detach_gallery_media, list_media, list_gallery_items) makes the missing disambiguation a real gap for correct tool selection.

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 0% for the single item_id parameter, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that the identifier refers to a gallery item being listed for, which is meaningful, but never states the expected format (UUID) or whether it is a gallery_item id or some other entity id.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (gallery_item_media rows) scoped to 'an item', which is more precise than the ambiguous sibling names like list_media. It doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from list_media or list_gallery_items, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative is named. With siblings such as list_media, list_gallery_items, and attach_gallery_media in the toolset, an agent gets no help deciding which to call; usage is only loosely implied by the phrase 'for an item'.

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