cli_list
Lists installed CLI providers with their paths to identify available options for task routing.
Instructions
List installed CLI providers with their paths.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Lists installed CLI providers with their paths to identify available options for task routing.
List installed CLI providers with their paths.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds no new behavioral context beyond confirming it's a list operation.
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?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words, making it highly concise.
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?
The description mentions output includes 'paths', providing minimal but sufficient detail for a tool with no output schema. Could be more specific about return format.
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?
With no parameters (schema properties empty), the description does not need to add param details. It implicitly covers the entire operation.
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?
The description uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('installed CLI providers with their paths'), clearly differentiating from sibling tools like cli_execute, cli_stats, and cli_route.
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?
The description implies usage for listing installed CLIs but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or mention exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/lleontor705/cli-orchestrator-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server