Skip to main content
Glama
mandalacomputer

Mandala Computer

Official
by mandalacomputer
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

List computers

list_computers
Read-only

Retrieve every computer on the account, filtering by state or workspace to check existence before acting. Terminal states deleted and lost appear only when requested.

Instructions

Every computer on this account that exists or may exist. Desktop credentials are deliberately not included — use get_desktop_url for those. Read state before acting on a row: it is the platform's record of whether the machine exists, which is a different question from status, what its host says the guest is doing. A row reading deleting is on its way out and is not one to bind, start or wait for, and one reading unreachable is a row served from the record because the host did not answer — the computer is most likely fine, but nothing only its host knows is on it, status included. The two terminal states are not here at all: deleted and lost come back only when asked for with state.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
stateNoOnly computers the platform's own record puts in this state — a different question from what the machine is doing, which is `status`. 'live': its host lists it. 'unreachable': its host did not answer THIS request, so the row is the identity on record and not what the machine says; the computer is most likely fine. 'deleting': a delete was sent and not answered yet. 'deleted' and 'lost' are terminal, and asking here is the ONLY way to see one — an unfiltered listing is live, unreachable and deleting, so a computer missing from it may still have a record.
workspace_idNoOnly the computers in this workspace (an id from list_workspaces), or 'unassigned' for the computers in no workspace. Combines with `state`. A workspace this key cannot reach — another account's, one that does not exist, or any but its own for a key confined to a workspace — is not found, and so is 'unassigned' from a confined key. Left out: every computer this key can see.
allow_partialNoAccept a short list when a hypervisor cannot be reached, instead of the 503 the platform answers by default. The answer then says it is short — a short list reads exactly like the missing computers were deleted.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.13.1

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The lone annotation (readOnlyHint) only says the call is safe; the description adds substantial context beyond it: credentials are omitted from rows, `unreachable` rows are served from the platform record rather than the host, those rows lack host-only fields like `status`, and `deleted`/`lost` only appear when explicitly filtered. This materially changes how an agent should interpret and trust the output.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the resource definition, then the credential exclusion, then the state-interpretation guidance, which is good ordering. It is on the verbose side and its state paragraph overlaps heavily with the schema description, so some sentences repeat rather than earn their place.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining what a returned row means, and it does: row states, terminal states, partial-list semantics and the credential omission. Combined with 100% schema coverage and a readOnly annotation, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret this correctly.

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% and the parameter docs are already exhaustive on `state`, `workspace_id` and `allow_partial`. The description's discussion of state and the 503 behavior largely paraphrases the schema, so it adds only the 'read state before acting' interpretation and does not go meaningfully beyond structured data. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('every computer on this account that exists or may exist') and immediately draws a boundary against a sibling by declaring desktop credentials excluded and routing to get_desktop_url. An agent can distinguish it from get_computer and get_desktop_url without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly routes credential needs to get_desktop_url and instructs the agent to read `state` before acting on a row, warning that `deleting` rows should not be bound, started or waited for. It does not, however, clarify when to prefer this over get_computer or how it relates to list_workspaces, so alternative-selection guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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