Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SAS MCP Server

SAS MCP Server

Official
by sassoftware
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

List Published Models

list_published_models
Read-onlyIdempotent

List models published to MAS, CAS, containers, or Git with their published name, state, and source model ID. Use it to find deployed copies or locate a published model for validation.

Instructions

List models published to destinations (MAS, CAS, containers, Git, ...).

Each entry names its destination, its published name, its state and the registered model it came from (modelId). Use it to find the published copy that validate_published_model checks, or to see where a model is already deployed.

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_published_models"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum entries (default 50).
name_filterNoOnly published names containing this text.
destination_nameNoOnly this destination (see ``list_publishing_destinations``).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.19.2

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds useful context about what each entry contains (destination, published name, state, source modelId), but says nothing about result size, truncation, or ordering behavior beyond the limit parameter.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, followed by the entry shape and then usage, with no filler sentences. The trailing "..." in the destination list is slightly loose but the paragraph stays tight overall.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple read-only list tool with an output schema and fully described parameters, this covers purpose, entry contents, and downstream cross-references. The only minor gap is the absence of any note on result limits or pagination interaction, which the limit parameter implies but does not fully explain.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters (limit, name_filter, destination_name) are already documented, including the default of 50 and the pointer to ``list_publishing_destinations``. The description adds no syntax or filtering semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ("List models published to destinations") and enumerates the destination kinds (MAS, CAS, containers, Git). It also distinguishes the resource from registered models by noting each entry carries the originating ``modelId``, so an agent can tell it apart from list_registered_models or list_model_versions.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives two concrete use cases: finding the published copy that ``validate_published_model`` checks, and seeing where a model is already deployed. That routes the agent well and cross-references both ``validate_published_model`` and ``list_publishing_destinations``, though it never states when not to use it or how it differs from the other list_* siblings.

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