Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Archiware MCP

Archiware MCP

by mnott
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

catalog_sets

Retrieve read-only catalogue set details, including tar count, file count, byte totals, and status, to inspect backup contents and verify set health.

Instructions

Read-only. Catalogue sets with tar count, file count, bytes and status.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "catalog_sets"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden, and it does at least declare "Read-only," which is the key safety trait the missing readOnlyHint would have provided. Beyond that it says nothing about permissions, pagination, cost, or whether the catalogue must be initialized first — relevant given sibling tools like catalog_init and catalog_migrate.

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?

A single short sentence with the safety qualifier front-loaded ahead of the content summary. The phrase "Catalogue sets" is slightly unclear, but no wording is wasted.

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?

For a zero-parameter read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description supplies enough: the safety profile and the shape of the returned record. It lacks only the preconditions or scoping context an agent might want given the surrounding catalog_* lifecycle tools.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The enumeration of returned fields is a bonus rather than compensation.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description names the resource (catalogue sets) and enumerates the data returned (tar count, file count, bytes, status), so an agent knows roughly what comes back. However, "Catalogue sets" is grammatically ambiguous and there is no differentiation from siblings like catalog_search or catalog_init, leaving the exact scope to inference.

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 guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as catalog_search for lookup versus this listing call. The only usage signal is "Read-only," which implies safe invocation but not selection between tools.

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