list_collectionsBrowse Bitcoin Stamps collections by ID, name, and creator. Retrieve stamp numbers, edition counts, and totals for market or portfolio research.
Stamp collections: id, name, description, creators, stamp numbers, stamp_count, total_editions.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| limit | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only lists output fields and says nothing about read-only behavior, pagination semantics, ordering, limits, or side effects. The agent is left without any behavioral context beyond the tool name.
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?
The description is very short, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently concise. It is a fragment listing fields, and it omits essential behavioral and usage information that should be included.
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?
Although the tool is simple and an output schema exists, the description does not cover how to select this tool over siblings, what pagination behavior to expect, or any operational context. The minimal field list leaves significant gaps for an agent deciding whether and how to invoke this tool.
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?
Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention the page or limit parameters at all. Since the schema only provides default values, the description fails to add any meaning about how pagination works or how these parameters affect the results.
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?
The description identifies the resource ('Stamp collections') and enumerates returned fields, but it lacks a clear verb and does not explicitly state that this tool lists multiple collections. The title 'List Collections' helps, but the description alone is closer to a data dictionary than a purpose statement, and it does not distinguish itself from siblings like get_collection.
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?
There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_collection, list_stamps, or search_stamps. No context is given for pagination, filtering, or typical use cases, so the agent must infer usage from the tool name and schema.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.