list_categoriesFetch all Plugolis MCP server categories with slugs, server counts, and server slugs to browse or organize the directory.
List every Plugolis server category with its slug, number of servers and the server slugs in it.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by specifying the exact returned fields, but says nothing about pagination, result size, or whether all categories are always included.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single, front-loaded sentence that packs verb, scope and return payload with no filler. Every clause earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no output schema, the description usefully names the returned fields, which an agent needs to consume the response. Only pagination/volume guidance is missing, so it is close to complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly signals a no-input, list-everything operation rather than implying any filtering options.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('server category') and enumerates the returned fields (slug, server count, server slugs). An agent can clearly distinguish it from search_servers, get_server, search_fixes and get_fix, which all operate on servers or fixes rather than categories.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies a browsing/enumeration use case but never states when to prefer this over search_servers or get_server, nor any prerequisites. Usage is inferable from the name and purpose rather than explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.