tela

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List atlas projects

atlas_list_projects

Read-only

List Atlas doc-generation projects you can access, with owner, output, schedule, source count, latest run status, coverage, and manage rights. Use it to find a project_id or check coverage health.

Instructions

List the atlas doc-generation projects you can see (your personal ones plus those of every org you belong to). Each project carries its owner, output space, schedule, source count, and latest-run summary (status + last must-cover rate); can_manage says whether you may trigger runs. Start here to find a project_id for atlas_run, or to read coverage health at a glance.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`projects`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.11.0Oct 15, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / projects / items / properties / unreachable_sources
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "integer"
+}
```

changedOutput schema / properties / projects / items / required

Previous value: -[
-  "id",
-  "name",
-  "owner",
-  "output_space",
-  "cadence",
-  "auto_update",
-  "sources_count",
-  "stale_sources",
-  "last_run",
-  "created_at",
-  "can_manage",
-  "scheduled_allowed"
-]New value: +[
+  "id",
+  "name",
+  "owner",
+  "output_space",
+  "cadence",
+  "auto_update",
+  "sources_count",
+  "stale_sources",
+  "unreachable_sources",
+  "last_run",
+  "created_at",
+  "can_manage",
+  "scheduled_allowed"
+]

First observedv0.1.0Jul 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare a safe read-only, closed-world operation, so the bar is lower. The description still adds useful context: the visibility rule (personal + all orgs) and the meaning of `can_manage` (whether you may trigger runs), which goes beyond what the safety hints provide.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the scope, then the payload contents, then the routing guidance. No sentence is filler; each adds a distinct fact.

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?

An output schema exists, so return fields need not be exhaustively explained, and for a zero-param read-only list the description covers scope, contents, and workflow entry point adequately. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there are no parameter semantics to document or compensate for.

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 (list) and resource (atlas doc-generation projects) plus the exact visibility scope (personal plus every org the user belongs to). An agent can distinguish it from siblings like atlas_run and atlas_run_status without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent to 'start here to find a project_id for atlas_run, or to read coverage health at a glance', naming the downstream tool and the reason to call this one. It does not state when-not to use it or contrast with atlas_run_status, so not quite a full 5.

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