action1-mcp-server

List Deployers

action1_list_endpoint_deployers

Read-onlyIdempotent

Identify all endpoint deployer services within a specific organization. Filter and view these deployed services by status, operating system, or installation date to manage your infrastructure.

Instructions

List Deployers. Lists all Action1 Deployer services in the specified organization. Perm: manage_endpoints.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`os`	No	Filter by operation system.
`from`	No	Provide the number of the first record to be returned.
`limit`	No	Set the maximum number of items to be returned (the page size).
`cursor`	No	next_cursor of the previous call; takes precedence over from.
`filter`	No	Provide a case-insensitive substring to filter and narrow down returned results (i.e., if...
`org_id`	No	Org UUID.
`sortby`	No	Define the sorting order by a certain field.
`status`	No	Specify the status.
`verbose`	No	Skip per-item compactor.
`auto_paginate`	No	Walk pages until limit or the size budget; then continue with next_cursor.
`installed_since`	No	Enter the installation date.
`response_format`	No	Output format. Default markdown.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	No
`count`	Yes
`items`	Yes
`total`	No
`has_more`	No
`next_cursor`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed11 schema fields changedv0.6.0Oct 26, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedInput schema / properties / auto_paginate / description

Previous value: -"Walk all pages."New value: +"Walk pages until limit or the size budget; then continue with next_cursor."

changedInput schema / properties / cursor / description

Previous value: -"Pagination cursor."New value: +"next_cursor of the previous call; takes precedence over from."

addedInput schema / properties / from / maximum
```
Added value: +9007199254740991
```
addedInput schema / properties / from / minimum
```
Added value: +0
```
addedInput schema / properties / limit / maximum
```
Added value: +50000
```
addedInput schema / properties / limit / minimum
```
Added value: +1
```

changedInput schema / properties / limit / type

Previous value: -"number"New value: +"integer"

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -trueNew value: +{}
```

addedOutput schema / properties / items / items / properties

Added value: +{
+  "address": {},
+  "external_address": {},
+  "id": {},
+  "install_date": {},
+  "last_seen": {},
+  "name": {},
+  "os": {},
+  "platform": {},
+  "self": {},
+  "status": {},
+  "type": {},
+  "version": {}
+}

First observedv0.5.0Jun 27, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare this is a safe, idempotent, read-only operation, so the bar is lower. The description adds the required permission ('Perm: manage_endpoints'), which is genuinely useful, but says nothing about pagination behavior despite 12 params including cursor/limit/auto_paginate, or what 'Deployer services' include in the response.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and scope, with the permission constraint last. The opening 'List Deployers' restates the title slightly, but the remaining text is efficient.

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?

With an output schema, full annotations, and 100% schema coverage, the description needs only to establish purpose, scope, and auth. It does that, but for a 12-parameter paginated listing tool it could mention that results are paginated/filterable and that organization scope comes from org_id.

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 every parameter including os, status, cursor, and auto_paginate is already documented. The description adds no filtering or pagination semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List Deployers') plus scope ('all Action1 Deployer services in the specified organization'), which clearly separates it from action1_get_deployer and action1_delete_deployer. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings, but the resource is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus action1_get_deployer (single deployer), action1_list_endpoints, or action1_get_windows_deployer_url. The only contextual note is the permission requirement, which is a prerequisite rather than a usage rule.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server