Skip to main content
Glama

list_projects

Retrieve a comprehensive list of all available Overleaf projects accessible via Git integration, enabling efficient management and analysis of LaTeX documents and their structures.

Instructions

List all available projects

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the 'list_projects' tool. It lists all configured Overleaf projects from projectsConfig, mapping each to an object with id, name, and projectId, and returns them as a JSON string in a text content block.
    case 'list_projects': {
      const projects = Object.entries(projectsConfig.projects).map(([key, project]) => ({
        id: key,
        name: project.name,
        projectId: project.projectId,
      }));
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(projects, null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • The tool registration in the ListToolsRequestHandler, including name, description, and empty input schema (no parameters required).
    {
      name: 'list_projects',
      description: 'List all configured Overleaf projects',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {},
      },
    },
  • The input schema for the list_projects tool, which is an empty object indicating no input parameters are needed.
    inputSchema: {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {},
    },
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List all available projects' implies a read-only operation, but it doesn't specify behavioral traits such as pagination, sorting, filtering, rate limits, authentication needs, or what 'available' means (e.g., active vs. archived). This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand how to interact with the tool effectively.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero waste: 'List all available projects'. It is front-loaded and directly conveys the core purpose without unnecessary elaboration, making it highly concise and well-structured for its simplicity.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for contextual understanding. It doesn't explain what 'projects' entail, the format of the returned list, or any constraints like visibility or access controls. For a tool with no structured support, more context is needed to guide the agent fully, especially regarding behavioral aspects.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, meaning no parameters are documented in the schema. The description doesn't add parameter details, which is appropriate since there are none to describe. This meets the baseline for tools with zero parameters, as there's no need to compensate for missing schema information.

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?

The description 'List all available projects' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('projects') with scope ('all available'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_files' (different resource) and 'get_sections' (different operation), though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from them. The purpose is unambiguous but lacks explicit sibling comparison.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, context for usage, or comparisons to siblings like 'get_sections' or 'list_files'. The agent must infer usage based solely on the tool name and description without explicit direction.

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

Related 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/mjyoo2/OverleafMCP'

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