Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
plugmcp

plugmcp

Official
by plugmcp-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

List categories

list_categories
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists directory categories with listing counts so you can pick a slug and use it as the category filter in search_servers.

Instructions

Directory categories with listing counts. Use a slug as the category filter in search_servers.

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_categories"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
categoriesYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.4

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and closed-world access, so safety is fully covered. The description adds that each category carries a listing count, which is a useful output trait beyond the structured hints, but says nothing about whether counts are live or approximate.

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 short sentences with zero filler. The data description comes first and the actionable routing hint (slug feeds search_servers) follows immediately.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With zero parameters, rich annotations and an output schema documenting the return shape, the definition covers what an agent needs in order to call the tool and use its result. Only the freshness semantics of the counts are unstated.

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?

The tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the 100% schema coverage baseline of 4 applies.

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 names the resource (directory categories) and adds a distinguishing detail, listing counts, which no sibling provides. It lacks an explicit verb like 'list', but 'Directory categories with listing counts' is unambiguous in context and no sibling overlaps with it.

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?

It states the downstream purpose: the returned slug is meant to be used as the category filter in search_servers, which implies when to call this tool (before filtering). It does not explicitly say when not to call it or whether results are cacheable, leaving the selection logic partly inferred.

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