PNETLab MCP Server

list_labs

List labs and subfolders within a workspace folder. Returns each lab's name, full path, and last-modified time.

Instructions

List labs and subfolders in a workspace folder (default '/'). Returns each lab's name, full path (use with open_lab/get_lab), and last-modified time. Pass a folder path to list a subfolder.

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": "list_labs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`folder`	No		/

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full transparency burden. It discloses return fields and hints that the path is for use with open_lab/get_lab, but does not explicitly state it is non-destructive or discuss any limits. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, no redundant words. Efficient and clear.

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?

Given an output schema exists (context signal), the description does not need to detail return values. It covers the input parameter and usage well, making the tool complete for its simple listing purpose.

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?

Schema has 0% description coverage. The description clarifies the 'folder' parameter beyond the schema by explaining its purpose: 'Pass a folder path to list a subfolder.' This adds meaningful usage context.

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?

The description states it 'list labs and subfolders in a workspace folder' and specifies return fields (name, full path, last-modified time). It distinguishes from siblings like list_running_labs and get_lab by its scope.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives the default folder ('/') and says to pass a folder path for subfolders. It does not explicitly compare with siblings, but the context of many list-type tools makes the usage clear.

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