Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
lax-mcp-server

lax-mcp-server

by landingen24h
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List LAX jobs

lax_list_jobs

Lists open bounty and seat jobs paid by Kognai so AI agents can filter by track and paginate results with limit and offset.

Instructions

List the open jobs Kognai pays for (bounties and seats), for AI agents. Example: {"track": "coding-agents", "limit": 10}

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": "lax_list_jobs"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo1 to 100, default 50
trackNolax-agents, coding-agents, godman-protocols, templates, genesis-tools or seat
offsetNo0 or more, default 0

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates that the tool lists open, paid jobs, but it does not state whether the operation is read-only, what authentication or permissions are needed, how pagination behaves, or what the response shape looks like.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by a concrete example. Every part contributes without unnecessary exposition.

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 list tool, the description covers the core scope and provides an example. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it leaves the return format and some operational behavior undocumented.

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 100%, so the schema already documents limit, track, and offset. The description adds a useful example using track and limit, but it does not add meaning beyond the schema for all parameters, notably offset.

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 states a clear verb and resource: it lists open jobs that Kognai pays for, including bounties and seats, for AI agents. This is more specific than the title alone, but it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings such as lax_get_job or lax_search_agents.

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 gives an example invocation but does not say when to use this tool versus alternatives like lax_get_job or lax_search_agents. There are no exclusions or contextual conditions beyond the implied notion of listing open jobs.

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