Skip to main content
Glama

list_credentials

View credential metadata for a wallet including names, types, and expiry dates without exposing sensitive values.

Instructions

List credential metadata for a wallet (names, types, expiry -- never shows values).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
wallet_idNoWallet ID. Auto-resolved for single-wallet sessions.

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the API call to list credential metadata.
      async (args) => {
        const walletId = args.wallet_id || 'default';
        const result = await apiClient.get(`/v1/wallets/${walletId}/credentials`);
        return toToolResult(result);
      },
    );
  • Registration function that defines the 'list_credentials' tool and its schema.
    export function registerListCredentials(
      server: McpServer,
      apiClient: ApiClient,
      walletContext?: WalletContext,
    ): void {
      server.tool(
        'list_credentials',
        withWalletPrefix(
          'List credential metadata for a wallet (names, types, expiry -- never shows values).',
          walletContext?.walletName,
        ),
        {
          wallet_id: z.string().optional().describe('Wallet ID. Auto-resolved for single-wallet sessions.'),
        },
        async (args) => {
          const walletId = args.wallet_id || 'default';
          const result = await apiClient.get(`/v1/wallets/${walletId}/credentials`);
          return toToolResult(result);
        },
      );
    }
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It successfully discloses the critical security trait that values are never exposed. However, it omits other behavioral markers like read-only safety, idempotency, or permission requirements that annotations typically cover.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Single efficient sentence with high information density. The parenthetical appends critical details without clutter. Every clause earns its place—no redundancy with schema or name.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Appropriately complete for a single-parameter list tool. Compensates for missing output schema by enumering returned fields (names, types, expiry) and security constraints. Minor gap: lacks mention of return format (array vs object) or pagination behavior.

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 coverage is 100% with the wallet_id parameter fully described in the schema ('Wallet ID. Auto-resolved for single-wallet sessions.'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics, meeting the baseline for high-coverage schemas.

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?

Excellent specificity: 'List' (verb), 'credential metadata' (resource), 'for a wallet' (scope). The parenthetical clarifies exactly what fields are returned (names, types, expiry) and explicitly excludes values, distinguishing it from hypothetical value-retrieval tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides implicit usage boundaries via 'never shows values', indicating this is for metadata inspection only. However, lacks explicit guidance on when to use vs. alternatives or prerequisites (e.g., wallet connection requirements).

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/minhoyoo-iotrust/WAIaaS'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server