Skip to main content
Glama
nacos-group

Nacos MCP Server

Official
by nacos-group

list_config_history

Retrieve the complete publish history of a configuration in Nacos to track changes and audit modifications over time.

Instructions

This interface retrieves the complete publish history of a configuration.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoYesThe current page number, default is 1.
pageSizeYesThe size of config history records in each page, default is 100
namespaceIdNoThe namespaceId of config, default is `public` if missing
groupNameYesThe groupName pattern of config, required.
dataIdYesThe dataId pattern of config, required.

Implementation Reference

  • Handler logic for the 'list_config_history' tool: retrieves the tool's Nacos API URL and performs a GET request with provided arguments, returning the result as text content.
    case nacos_tools.NacosToolNames.LIST_CONFIG_HISTORY:
        url = nacos_tools.NacosListConfigHistory().url
        result = nacos.get(name, url, arguments)
        return [types.TextContent(type="text", text=result)]
  • Tool class definition providing schema, description, name, and Nacos API endpoint URL for 'list_config_history'.
    class NacosListConfigHistory(NacosTool):
        def __init__(self):
            super().__init__(
                name=NacosToolNames.LIST_CONFIG_HISTORY,
                description="This interface retrieves the complete publish history of a configuration.",
                inputSchema={
                    "type": "object",
                    "properties": {
                        "pageNo": {"type": "int", "description": "The current page number, default is 1."},
                        "pageSize": {"type": "int",
                                     "description": "The size of config history records in each page, default is 100"},
                        "namespaceId": {"type": "string",
                                        "description": "The namespaceId of config, default is `public` if missing"},
                        "groupName": {"type": "string",
                                      "description": "The groupName pattern of config, required."},
                        "dataId": {"type": "string",
                                   "description": "The dataId pattern of config, required."},
                    },
                    "required": ["pageNo", "pageSize", "groupName", "dataId"],
                },
                url="/nacos/v3/admin/cs/history/list"
            )
  • Registration of the 'list_config_history' tool (line 82) in the MCP server's list_tools() method.
    return [
        nacos_tools.NacosListNamespacesTool(),
        nacos_tools.NacosListServices(),
        nacos_tools.NacosGetService(),
        nacos_tools.NacosListInstances(),
        nacos_tools.NacosListServiceSubscribers(),
        nacos_tools.NacosListConfigs(),
        nacos_tools.NacosGetConfig(),
        nacos_tools.NacosListConfigHistory(),
        nacos_tools.NacosGetConfigHistory(),
        nacos_tools.NacosListConfigListeners(),
        nacos_tools.NacosListListenedConfigs(),
    ]
  • Enum constant defining the tool name 'list_config_history' in NacosToolNames.
    LIST_CONFIG_HISTORY = "list_config_history",
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'retrieves' which implies a read operation, but doesn't cover critical aspects like pagination behavior (implied by parameters but not explained), rate limits, authentication needs, or what 'complete publish history' entails (e.g., timestamps, versions). This leaves significant gaps for safe and effective use.

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 that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and every part earns its place, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool with 5 parameters and pagination behavior. It doesn't explain the return format (e.g., what fields are in the history), error conditions, or how 'complete' history interacts with pagination. For a read operation with multiple inputs, more context is needed for reliable use.

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 the schema fully documents all 5 parameters with defaults and requirements. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying pagination and filtering by namespace/group/data patterns, which are already clear from the schema. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the action ('retrieves') and resource ('complete publish history of a configuration'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_config_history' or 'list_configs', which might have overlapping functionality, so it doesn't achieve full sibling differentiation.

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 like 'get_config_history' or 'list_configs'. It lacks context about prerequisites, exclusions, or specific scenarios where this tool is preferred, leaving the agent to guess based on tool names alone.

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/nacos-group/nacos-mcp-server'

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