Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
xuanshang-canvas

xuanshang-canvas

by pencil102411-cell
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

list_certified_groups

Read-onlyIdempotent

List a project's certification groups and show each image or video's real-time certification status and whether it is already placed on the canvas.

Instructions

项目的认证分组，以及组内每个素材（图片、视频）的认证状态（向玄上实时查）、是否已经放到画布上。

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": {
      "project": "<project>"
    },
    "name": "list_certified_groups"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectYes项目名称或项目 ID（用 list_projects 查）

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered without the description. The description does add one genuine behavioral detail beyond annotations: the certification status is fetched live ('向玄上实时查'), telling the agent the data is not stale/cached. It stops short of describing cost, latency, or batching behavior.

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 dense sentence that front-loads the resource and packs the three returned fields without filler. It is efficient, though the run-on parenthetical structure makes it slightly harder to parse than a clearly punctuated list of returned fields.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no further explanation, and annotations cover the safety profile. What is missing is the usage context: when an agent should call this versus canvas_status, and whether project is required (schema covers that). Adequate but with a clear routing gap.

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?

There is a single required parameter (project) and schema description coverage is 100%, with the schema itself pointing the agent to list_projects for lookup. The description adds no further parameter meaning, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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 (认证分组) and enumerates the content it surfaces: per-asset certification status and whether each asset is on the canvas. However, it is a noun phrase fragment with no explicit verb, and it does not differentiate itself from the sibling canvas_status, which plausibly reports overlapping canvas state. An agent can guess the data returned but not cleanly why this tool exists beside canvas_status.

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 statement, no prerequisites, and no mention of any alternative sibling (e.g. canvas_status or list_projects). The only routing hint comes from the schema parameter description ('用 list_projects 查'), not the tool description itself.

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