Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@vitrion/zentria-mcp

@vitrion/zentria-mcp

Official
by vitrionbv
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list-forms

Read-only

Retrieve sales forms from the CRM with search and pagination options to browse and locate specific submissions.

Instructions

List sales forms (GET /api/public/sales/forms). Scope: sales:read.

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-forms"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoSearch query.
pageNoPage number (default 1).
itemsPerPageNoItems per page (default 25, max 100).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the HTTP method (GET) and required scope (sales:read), which is useful context, but does not detail pagination behavior or response shape beyond what the schema implies.

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, compact sentence that includes the key information: what the tool does, the endpoint, and the required scope. There is no redundant or filler content.

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 straightforward read-only list operation, the description plus schema and annotations provide enough context. It does not explain the return format, but no output schema is provided and the tool's purpose is simple enough that this is not a critical gap.

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?

All three parameters (q, page, itemsPerPage) are fully described in the input schema, so the description does not need to add much. It adds no parameter-specific detail beyond the schema, which is acceptable at the baseline for high schema coverage.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'List sales forms', and also includes the exact endpoint. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like create-form, update-form, get-form, and list-form-submissions.

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 makes the use case clear: listing sales forms. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling list and the endpoint make the intended context obvious enough.

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