Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
sape-mcp

sape-mcp

by sshra
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

list_projects

Retrieve optimizer projects and campaigns with optional URL and link counts, and choose whether to include deleted items.

Instructions

Список проектов (кампаний) оптимизатора с количеством урлов и ссылок.

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_projects"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
show_countsNo
show_deletedNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that counts are returned but says nothing about whether deleted projects are hidden by default, whether the list is paginated or capped, or what permissions are needed — all relevant to a list call with a show_deleted switch.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

A single short sentence with zero filler, front-loading the resource and the yielded data. Nothing is repeated from the schema and no sentence is wasted.

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

Completeness2/5

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

An output schema exists, so return structure need not be explained, but the definition still leaves the two boolean flags and the default filtering behavior undocumented. For a list tool with no annotations and 0% schema coverage, more guidance on scope and filtering is required.

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%: show_counts and show_deleted appear only as bare boolean titles with defaults. The description implies the counts behavior ('с количеством урлов и ссылок') but never explains the show_deleted flag or what happens to deleted projects when it is toggled, leaving half the parameters uninterpreted.

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 states a specific verb and resource — listing optimizer projects (campaigns) together with URL and link counts — which is more informative than the tool name alone. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like get_project (singular) or list_urls, so the differentiation is left to inference.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus get_project or list_urls, and no mention of prerequisites, pagination expectations, or result size. The agent must infer from the name that this is the enumeration entry point before drilling into a single project.

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