Jungle Grid MCP Server

list_job_inputs

Read-only

Retrieve uploaded job inputs and their mount paths for the authenticated account, enabling verification of data availability before submitting workloads.

Instructions

List uploaded job inputs for the authenticated account, including mount paths.

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": "list_job_inputs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.20.2Sep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by specifying the authenticated-account scope and that mount paths are included, which is useful 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action, resource, scope, and key output detail efficiently.

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?

With no parameters, an output schema present, and annotations covering the read-only/destructive profile, the description is complete for correct tool selection and invocation. Nothing critical is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to add. The baseline of 4 for a no-parameter tool is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('uploaded job inputs'), and clarifies scope ('for the authenticated account') plus the notable detail of including mount paths. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like upload_job_input and list_jobs.

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?

The description makes it clear this is the tool for retrieving the authenticated account's uploaded job inputs, which is sufficient context for selection. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the read-only list nature and sibling set make the intended usage obvious.

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

Deploy Server