Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CVAT MCP

CVAT MCP

by jangjs1216
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

cvat_list_projects

List CVAT projects using filters for search, owner, assignee, sorting, and pagination.

Instructions

List CVAT projects with /api/projects filters such as search, owner, assignee, sort, page, and page_size.

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": "cvat_list_projects"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
searchNo
ownerNo
assigneeNo
sortNo
pageNoCVAT page number.
page_sizeNoNumber of results per page.

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 carries full burden. It only mentions 'list' and filters, but fails to disclose read-only nature, pagination behavior, authentication needs, or error handling.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource, no wasted words. However, it could include brief usage context without becoming too long.

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?

No output schema, low schema coverage, and no explanation of return structure or pagination details. The description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 33% (only page and page_size have descriptions). The description merely lists parameter names without adding meaning or format details, and does not compensate for the low coverage.

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 clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'CVAT projects', and mentions specific filters. It distinguishes from sibling tools like cvat_list_tasks and cvat_list_jobs by focusing on projects.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only lists filters without context or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and sibling 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