Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP 3DVista

MCP 3DVista

by juanchacon98
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

listar_acciones

Lists the 3DVista tour actions available for code generation, including their parameters, so you can select and configure the right action before writing JavaScript.

Instructions

Lista las acciones que generar_codigo sabe producir, con sus parametros.

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": "listar_acciones"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.4.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description must carry the behavioral load. 'Lista' implies a non-mutating read, and 'con sus parametros' hints that the response includes per-action parameter information, but there is no statement about side effects, output format, or ordering. Adequate for a trivial zero-argument enumeration, thin for anything richer.

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?

One compact sentence with the resource and its scope front-loaded; no filler, no restatement of the name. Everything present earns its place.

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 zero-parameter, non-destructive listing tool with no output schema, the description covers what it does but not how results should be consumed (e.g., that the returned action names/parameters are the inputs to generar_codigo). The dependency is stated only obliquely.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The phrase 'con sus parametros' usefully clarifies that parameters belong to the returned actions, not to this call.

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 pairs a specific verb ('Lista') with a specific resource ('las acciones') and bounds it to those that 'generar_codigo sabe producir', which ties it to the sibling that consumes the result. It stops just short of a 5 because it does not contrast itself with any other discovery/listing tool.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: by naming generar_codigo as the producer of these actions, an agent can infer this should be called before invoking generar_codigo to discover valid actions. There is no explicit 'call this before X' or any exclusion of alternatives.

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