Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mguttmann

action1-mcp-server

by mguttmann
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

List setting templates

action1_list_setting_templates
Read-onlyIdempotent

List Action1 setting templates to review existing configurations. Filter results by name substring and choose markdown or JSON output for quick reference.

Instructions

List setting templates. Gets a list of existing setting templates.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filterNoProvide a case-insensitive substring to filter and narrow down returned results (i.e., if...
verboseNoSkip per-item compactor.
response_formatNoOutput format. Default markdown.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteNo
countYes
itemsYes
totalNo
truncatedNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.6.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • 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: +{
+  "applicable_for": {},
+  "available_scopes": {},
+  "category": {},
+  "default_value": {},
+  "description": {},
+  "id": {},
+  "name": {},
+  "self": {},
+  "type": {},
+  "value_pattern": {},
+  "value_pattern_description": {},
+  "value_type": {}
+}
  2. First observedv0.5.0

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds nothing beyond that — no mention of result volume, pagination behavior, whether the list is org-scoped or enterprise-wide, or how the optional filter affects results.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is short, but the brevity is under-specification rather than economy — the second sentence is pure redundancy that occupies space without earning it. Two sentences where one tautological clause would have carried identical information.

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

Completeness2/5

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

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required, and 100% schema coverage covers parameters. However, with ~150 sibling tools and a closely related cluster of setting/setting-template tools, the description leaves out critical context: what a 'setting template' actually is in this system and how it relates to action1_list_settings and action1_get_setting_template.

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 all three parameters (filter, verbose, response_format) are already documented in the schema. The description contributes no additional parameter meaning, such as what 'verbose' does in practice or default ordering. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description is essentially a tautology: 'List setting templates. Gets a list of existing setting templates.' The second sentence restates the name and title without adding a verb-scope distinction. It does not distinguish this tool from sibling action1_list_settings (which lists actual settings instances) or action1_get_setting_template.

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance is given, despite a crowded sibling set including action1_list_settings, action1_get_setting_template, action1_list_action_templates, and action1_search. An agent must infer the distinction between 'templates' and 'settings' entirely from the tool name.

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