Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
scout-mcp

scout-mcp

by tusharchaudharryy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

list_docs

Read-only

Lists the user's notes with their sizes and searchable passage counts, helping agents assess available personal content before searching.

Instructions

List the user's notes with their size and number of searchable passages.

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_docs"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already establish that this is a read-only, closed-world operation. The description adds useful context about what each entry includes, but it does not mention ordering, pagination, or limits for a list operation, and because an output schema exists, return-value disclosure carries less weight.

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 definition is a single efficient sentence that leads with the action and resource, then adds the relevant returned fields. It contains no filler or redundant wording.

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 zero-parameter list tool with annotations and an output schema, the description is sufficiently complete: it states the resource and the notable contents. Minor operational details such as ordering or pagination are absent, but they are not essential for correct invocation here.

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?

The tool takes no parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to clarify. The schema coverage is complete, and the description does not need to compensate for missing parameter details.

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 uses a clear verb-resource pair, 'List' and 'the user's notes,' and names what is included in each result: size and number of searchable passages. It does not explicitly distinguish this tool from the sibling search_docs, but its purpose is still clear.

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 implies that the tool is used for enumerating notes, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose it over search_docs or read_doc. It also gives no exclusions or prerequisites.

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