SassyMCP

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

sassy_tool_catalog

Read-onlyIdempotent

Enumerate live-registered MCP tools with counts, filters, and grouping to map server capabilities without drift, supporting group and substring query filters.

Instructions

Read-only. Enumerates every currently registered tool derived live from the tool registry (so it never drifts from reality), returning total count, per-group counts, the applied filters, and tools grouped by group as name plus one-line purpose, sorted by group then name. group (default empty = all) filters to one tool group; use sassy_tool_groups to learn valid group names. query (default empty) is a case-insensitive substring match against the tool name or its purpose line. Use this as the client-agnostic capability map to see what the server can actually do; prefer it over sassy_tool_groups when you need tool-level detail rather than group metadata.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`group`	No
`query`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv1.15.1Sep 18, 2026

addedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +true
```

removedOutput schema / properties

Removed value: -{
-  "result": {
-    "title": "Result",
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-}

removedOutput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "result"
-]
```

changedOutput schema / title

Previous value: -"sassy_tool_catalogOutput"New value: +"sassy_tool_catalogDictOutput"

First observedv0.1.0Jul 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds the key behavior that it is derived live from the registry, so it never drifts from reality, which is extra context beyond the annotations. No contradictions found. The only missing detail is that it doesn't mention pagination or limits, but for a read-only enumeration this is adequate.

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?

The description is a single dense paragraph but front-loaded with the key purpose and live registry detail. It packs a lot of information (return format, sorting, filters, sibling guidance) with minimal waste. It is somewhat long but every sentence earns its place, and the structure is logical: what, how, parameters, and when to use.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's simplicity (2 optional params, no required), the description covers everything an agent needs: what it returns (counts, grouped tools, filters), how to filter (group, query), how to get valid group names (sassy_tool_groups), and when to use it (capability map). The output schema exists, so return format is covered. No critical gaps.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must fully explain the parameters. It does: 'group (default empty = all) filters to one tool group; use sassy_tool_groups to learn valid group names' and 'query (default empty) is a case-insensitive substring match against the tool name or its purpose line'. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, compensating for the zero coverage.

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?

The description clearly states the tool enumerates registered tools with live registry data, returning counts and grouped details. It distinguishes itself from sassy_tool_groups by emphasizing tool-level detail vs group metadata, and from other tools by focusing on capability mapping. The verb 'enumerates' and resource 'tool registry' are specific and unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states when to use: 'as the client-agnostic capability map to see what the server can actually do' and when to prefer alternatives: 'prefer it over sassy_tool_groups when you need tool-level detail rather than group metadata'. This provides clear routing to siblings.

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

Deploy Server