Skip to main content
Glama

list_projects

Retrieve all projects from the QASE test management platform. Use this tool to view project details and manage testing workflows.

Instructions

Get All Projects

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
offsetNo

Implementation Reference

  • Core handler function that pipes the Qase client getProjects method to a result transformer.
    export const listProjects = pipe(
      client.projects.getProjects.bind(client.projects),
      toResult,
    );
  • Zod schema defining optional limit and offset parameters for listing projects.
    export const ListProjectsSchema = z.object({
      limit: z.number().optional(),
      offset: z.number().optional(),
    });
  • src/index.ts:131-134 (registration)
    Tool registration in the ListToolsRequestSchema handler, declaring name, description, and input schema.
      name: 'list_projects',
      description: 'Get All Projects',
      inputSchema: zodToJsonSchema(ListProjectsSchema),
    },
  • MCP server CallToolRequestSchema handler that parses arguments using the schema and invokes the listProjects function.
    .with({ name: 'list_projects' }, ({ arguments: args }) => {
      const { limit, offset } = ListProjectsSchema.parse(args);
      return listProjects(limit, offset);
    })
Behavior1/5

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, but it offers no information about the tool's behavior. It doesn't mention whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions might be required, how results are returned (e.g., pagination, sorting), potential rate limits, or error conditions. The description is too minimal to provide any useful behavioral context.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is extremely concise at just three words, which could be appropriate if it were more informative. However, it's under-specified rather than efficiently structured—it doesn't front-load critical information or use its brevity to convey essential details. While not verbose, it wastes its minimal word count on a tautological phrase that adds little value.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (2 parameters with no schema descriptions, no annotations, no output schema), the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how to use the parameters, behavioral traits, or differentiation from siblings. For a list operation with pagination parameters, this level of documentation leaves critical gaps that would hinder an AI agent's ability to use 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?

The input schema has 2 parameters (limit, offset) with 0% description coverage, meaning the schema provides no semantic information about these parameters. The description 'Get All Projects' doesn't mention any parameters at all, failing to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation. Users would have no idea what limit and offset do or how to use them effectively.

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 'Get All Projects' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'list_projects' without adding meaningful specificity. It uses a generic verb 'Get' rather than a more precise action like 'List' or 'Retrieve', and doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'get_project' (singular) or other list operations like 'get_cases' or 'get_plans'. The description fails to clarify what 'All Projects' means in context.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple sibling tools with similar naming patterns (e.g., 'get_project' for a single project, 'get_cases' for cases), but the description doesn't indicate that this tool retrieves multiple projects or explain when to choose it over other retrieval tools. No context, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/rikuson/mcp-qase'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server