proofcut

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

inset_ls

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists all insets bottom-first with playback positions and rect locations, flagging unresolved insets (e.g., from removed cuts) as errors for easy identification.

Instructions

Every inset, bottom of the stack first, with where each plays and where its rect lands.

Each carries its position (as inset_rm takes it). Insets that cannot resolve — a cut removed a start word — come back as insets_error beside the stored records, so the one to move or remove can still be found.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	No	The project directory to act on. Omit it — the usual case — when this server is bound to a project (started as `proofcut -C DIR mcp`, or inside a project; `ping` says which): it then resolves to that one bound project, a relative path resolves against it, and a path outside it is refused by name. Unbound, `path` is the whole address and omitting it refuses rather than guessing.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.36.0Sep 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds genuinely new behavior: stack order ('bottom of the stack first'), the inclusion of `position` in each entry, and the error-container behavior for unresolved insets ('cut removed a start word'). This goes beyond the structured hints.

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?

Three short, information-dense sentences. The main result is stated first, followed by the position convention, then the failure behavior. No filler or repetition of schema content.

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?

For a one-optional-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description covers ordering, output content, and error handling; the schema covers path semantics, so an agent has everything needed to invoke it 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 schema already documents the only parameter (`path`) at 100% coverage with a full explanation of bound/unbound behavior. The description adds nothing about parameters, so the appropriate baseline is 3.

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 opening line 'Every inset, bottom of the stack first...' specifies the operation (list all insets), the resource (insets), the ordering, and what is reported (play position and rect). It also references inset_rm's position format, separating this read/list tool from its sibling inset_add/inset_rm.

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 tells the agent when the listing is useful: to locate stored records and their position for moving/removing via inset_rm, and that unresolved insets are still returned as errors. It does not explicitly state when to avoid the tool or compare it to other list tools, but for a read-only enumeration this context is sufficient.

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

Deploy Server