Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
opencode-mcp-bridge

opencode-mcp-bridge

by teodorgross
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

List available agents

opencode_agents

Lists configured coding agents with mode and description to select the correct agent for dispatching tasks.

Instructions

Lists the agents configured in opencode with their mode and description, for use as the 'agent' parameter of a dispatch.

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": "opencode_agents"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
directoryNoProject directory whose agent configuration should be read.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It describes a read-only list operation ('Lists') but does not disclose edge cases such as behavior when the directory is invalid or omitted. For a simple listing tool, the lack of additional behavioral context is a minor gap.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that states the action, the resource, and the purpose with zero wasted words.

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 listing tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently conveys the return content (agents with mode and description) and the intended use case. It does not mention default directory behavior, but it is adequately complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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?

The single parameter 'directory' is fully documented in the schema (100% coverage), and the tool description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema. The phrase 'configured in opencode' gives context but does not add parameter-level details, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'Lists', identifies the resource 'agents configured in opencode', and clearly states the purpose ('for use as the agent parameter of a dispatch'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools such as dispatch or models.

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?

The description explicitly ties the tool's output to the 'agent' parameter of a dispatch, implying when this tool should be used. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare directly with alternatives, but the use case is clear.

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