Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
aeza-mcp

aeza-mcp

by rdydygin
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

domains_get_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves a paginated list of domains, with sorting, filtering, and limit/offset controls for managing domain records.

Instructions

Domains get list GET /domains

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": "domains_get_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortNo
limitNo
filterNo
offsetNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

D1.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered by structured data. The description adds nothing beyond that: no pagination behavior, no return shape, no rate-limit or scope notes for an open-world listing call.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is very short and front-loaded, but the brevity reflects under-specification rather than conciseness: the second line is a raw endpoint string that adds little actionable meaning for an agent.

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

Completeness1/5

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

A four-parameter, paginated, filtered listing tool with an undocumented schema and no output schema needs the description to explain filter/sort/pagination. None of that is present, so the definition is not complete enough to call the tool correctly.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% for four parameters (sort, limit, filter, offset), and the description supplies no meaning at all — not even the filter field's syntax or allowed sort keys. For a 0%-coverage schema the description must compensate, and it does not.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description is essentially the tool name restated ("Domains get list") plus the raw endpoint "GET /domains". It conveys the resource and an implied listing operation, but adds no differentiating detail versus siblings such as domains_get or domains_get_records_list.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer domains_get (single domain) or domains_get_records_list (DNS records) instead. The agent must infer the distinction from the names alone.

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