Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ibm-mq-mcp

ibm-mq-mcp

by moonfruit
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

list_subscriptions

Read-onlyIdempotent

List subscriptions on an IBM MQ queue manager, using an optional name pattern to filter results for targeted inspection.

Instructions

列出订阅。

Args: qmgr: 队列管理器名称，例如 QM1 name: 订阅名过滤，支持通配符，例如 DEV.* 或 *

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "qmgr": "<qmgr>"
    },
    "name": "list_subscriptions"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo*
qmgrYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

注解已经提供了 readOnlyHint=true、destructiveHint=false、idempotentHint=true，描述在注解之外额外披露了 name 参数支持通配符过滤（如 DEV.* 或 *），并借助默认值暗示默认列出全部订阅。由于存在输出 schema，未描述返回结构不算明显缺口。

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?

描述非常简短，第一行直接点明功能，随后用两行参数说明覆盖了全部必要信息，没有冗余内容，结构清晰且便于代理快速扫描。

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

Completeness5/5

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

对于只有 2 个参数、1 个必选参数的简单列表工具，描述已经覆盖了调用所需的全部语义；注解覆盖安全特征，输出 schema 负责返回结构，因此没有明显的信息缺失。

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

Parameters5/5

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

input schema 中没有属性描述（覆盖率为 0%），描述完全承担了参数说明：qmgr 是队列管理器名称并给出示例 QM1，name 是订阅名过滤条件且支持通配符，并给出 DEV.* 和 * 两个示例。两个参数的含义和格式都得到了清晰交代。

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?

描述以明确的动词和资源“列出订阅”说明了工具用途，并结合 qmgr 和 name 参数进一步明确了操作对象是队列管理器中的订阅。但它没有在描述中明确与其他列表类兄弟工具（如 list_queues、list_topics）进行区分，主要依赖工具名称完成区分。

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?

描述通过参数说明了使用场景：必须提供队列管理器 qmgr，可选择 name 进行通配符过滤，因此隐含了“列出指定队列管理器下订阅”的用法。但描述没有说明何时不应使用本工具、是否存在替代工具，也没有给出明确的使用边界。

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