Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Document Processor

MCP Document Processor

Official
by leanzero-srl
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

list-templates

List available document templates and auto-learned blueprints to apply structure or style when creating documents.

Instructions

List available document templates AND blueprints. Templates are static, named structures (e.g. 'claude-like', 'technical-docs', 'business-report') you can reference via tags on create-doc. Blueprints are auto-learned structures stored in .document-blueprints.json. Use the returned name as blueprint: in create-doc, or as a tag for create-doc tag-based style detection.

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-templates"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
categoryNoOptional category filter (matches blueprints' learnedFrom category and templates' recommendedFor).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It adds behavioral context by defining templates and blueprints, but lacks disclosure on read-only nature, authentication needs, or side effects. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. First sentence states purpose, second provides usage context with clear examples. Every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description explains the two result types and their application in create-doc. It could mention if the list is all available or filtered, but overall fairly complete for a list tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% for the single parameter. The description adds value by linking the category filter to 'learnedFrom' and 'recommendedFor', enhancing understanding beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states the tool lists both document templates and blueprints, distinguishing between the two types. It also explains how the returned `name` is used with create-doc, providing specific verb and resource identification.

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 explicitly tells when to use the tool (to get names for referencing in create-doc) and what to do with the results. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context is clear among siblings.

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