Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
storedge-mcp

storedge-mcp

by sanjibani
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

list_move_ins

Retrieve all current move-ins scheduled at a facility. Filter by facility, page, and page size to find specific move-in records.

Instructions

List current (in-progress) move-ins for the facility.

Use when: "what move-ins are scheduled this week?".

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_move_ins"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNo
per_pageNo
facility_idNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the tool lists in-progress move-ins (read behavior), but does not mention permissions, pagination behavior, or what happens with no results. The output schema covers return structure, so a score of 3 is appropriate.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Two sentences with a clear first sentence stating purpose and a second providing usage direction. No wasted words, though the usage sentence is slightly colloquial.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description gives the core purpose and a usage hint. However, it does not explain the meaning of 'current (in-progress)' versus 'scheduled', nor does it cover the parameters. Output schema exists, so return values are documented, but the description could be more complete given the tool's complexity.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning no parameter descriptions in the schema. The description only indirectly references facility context via 'for the facility' but does not explain page, per_page, or facility_id. This is insufficient for a tool with three undocumented parameters.

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 clearly states it lists current (in-progress) move-ins for the facility, using a specific verb and resource. While it distinguishes from siblings via the resource name, it does not explicitly differentiate from list_move_outs or others.

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 provides a usage scenario ('what move-ins are scheduled this week?') but no when-not or alternatives. The guidance is clear but lacks exclusions, so it's adequate but not strong.

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