Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
geo-osiris-mcp

geo-osiris-mcp

by osviel91
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

list_sources

List configured external geospatial sources to identify which datasets are available for read or staging operations via Geo Hub.

Instructions

List configured external sources.

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_sources"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
cursorNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
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. It only says 'List' and does not confirm read-only behavior, pagination semantics, ordering, or data freshness. The limit/cursor parameters hint at pagination, but the description itself adds no transparency.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler words. It conveys the essential purpose efficiently, though it could have added compact guidance about pagination or related tools without becoming verbose.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple listing tool with two optional parameters and an output schema, the description provides the core action and resource. However, it lacks any context about pagination behavior or when to choose this tool over siblings, leaving the agent to infer those details from the schema and tool names.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description makes no mention of limit or cursor, so it adds no parameter-level meaning. The parameter names and defaults in the schema are somewhat self-explanatory, which prevents a score of 1, but the description does not compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 ('List') and the resource ('configured external sources'), which distinguishes it from siblings like list_layers and get_source. It does not explicitly contrast itself with those siblings, so it falls just short of a 5.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_source or list_layers, and it does not mention pagination or any selection criteria. The usage context is only weakly implied by the verb 'List'.

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