Skip to main content
Glama
thenavidm

fal.ai MCP Server

by thenavidm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

List requests by endpoint(s)

list_requests_by_endpoint
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve request history for one or more endpoints, filtered by time range, status, or request ID, with pagination, sorting, and optional payloads.

Instructions

Lists requests for one or more endpoints (same endpoint_id style as usage/explore: comma-separated or repeated query params, up to 50 IDs).

Authentication: Requires API key (user or enterprise).

Filters:

  • Time range via start / end. If start is omitted, defaults to the last 24 hours — unless request_id is provided, in which case the default start bound is widened to 90 days.

  • Status (success, error, user_error)

  • Request ID

  • Pagination via cursor/limit (limit defaults to 50, max 100)

Sorting:

  • By end time (default) or duration

Expansions:

  • Include payloads by adding expand=payloads

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endNoEnd date in ISO8601 format, exclusive (e.g., '2025-02-01T00:00:00Z' or '2025-02-01'). Data up to but not including this timestamp is returned. Defaults to current time.
limitNoNumber of items to return per page (max 100)
startNoStart date in ISO8601 format (e.g., '2025-01-01T00:00:00Z' or '2025-01-01'). Defaults to 24 hours ago.
cursorNoPagination cursor encoding the page number
expandNoFields to expand in the response. Use payloads to include input and output payloads.
statusNoFilter by request status
accountNoExact private account key profile label, not an authenticated provider owner ID.
sort_byNoSort results by end time or durationended_at
request_idNoFilter by specific request ID
endpoint_idYesFilter by specific endpoint ID(s). Accepts 1-50 endpoint IDs. Supports comma-separated values: ?endpoint_id=model1,model2 or array syntax: ?endpoint_id=model1&endpoint_id=model2

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new context: API-key authentication is required, the default 24-hour window is widened to 90 days when request_id is supplied, and pagination limits are 50/100. It does not describe the response shape, which is a minor residual gap.

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, then organized under bolded Authentication/Filters/Sorting/Expansions headings so an agent can scan it quickly. Slight redundancy: the limit default of 50 and max of 100 is restated from the schema's own description.

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 10-parameter read-only list tool with full schema coverage, annotations, and no output schema, the description covers auth, filtering, defaults, sorting, and expansion. Only the returned item structure is unaddressed, which is a minor omission given the tool is a conventional paginated list.

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 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter and baseline is 3. The description goes beyond it by explaining the conditional default on start (24h, or 90 days when request_id is present), the sort options, and the expand=payloads mechanism — interactions the schema does not capture.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Lists requests') scoped to 'one or more endpoints', which is a meaningful narrowing versus the generic sibling search_requests. It does not explicitly name search_requests or say how the two differ, so the agent must infer the distinction from the endpoint_id requirement.

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?

The description establishes when the tool applies (per-endpoint request retrieval) and cross-references 'usage/explore' for the endpoint_id syntax, but never states when to prefer it over search_requests or any exclusion. Usage is implied by the required endpoint_id rather than stated.

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