docs_listList Lichtblick documentation pages with paths and summaries. Filter by section such as Documentation or Guides to find relevant pages quickly.
Lists the pages of the Lichtblick documentation with their path and summary.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| section | No | Only list pages of this section, e.g. "Documentation" or "Guides". |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description does add useful behavioral context by naming the returned fields (path and summary), which matters since there is no output schema. However, it says nothing about ordering, pagination, result limits, or scope of the listing.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, and it efficiently packs in both the action and the return shape. Nothing could be trimmed without losing information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a one-parameter, read-only list tool with no output schema, the essential information (what is listed, what each entry contains) is present. It falls just short of complete because pagination behavior and the relationship to the sibling search/fetch tools remain unstated.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100% for the single optional 'section' parameter, so the schema fully documents it, including examples ("Documentation", "Guides"). The description adds nothing about the filter, so the baseline of 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb ("Lists") and resource ("pages of the Lichtblick documentation") plus the fields returned (path, summary). It is clear what the tool does, but it never contrasts itself with docs_search or docs_fetch, so the agent must infer the listing-vs-searching distinction from the name alone.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and the sibling tools docs_search and docs_fetch are not mentioned. The agent can only infer from the word "Lists" that this is the enumeration/browse entry point rather than a query or fetch tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.