Skip to main content
Glama
ztemerbekov

A1 Yandex KIT MCP

by ztemerbekov
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

List collections

list_collections
Read-only

Browse store collections page by page, filtering by static/dynamic type or status. The response indicates partial coverage, so verify listing completeness.

Instructions

List collections of the store (paginated). A collection is a curated set of product cards: STATIC (filled manually via manage_collection_cards) or DYNAMIC (filled by filters). The response carries a machine-readable coverage envelope (coverage, received, total_count, pages_read); coverage:"partial" MUST be reflected in the user-facing answer and forbids claiming the listing is complete.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
allNoFetch all pages via auto-pagination, up to 500 items; ignores page/per_page.
pageNoPage number, starting at 1 (default 1).
typeNoFilter by collection type.
fieldsNoCSV columns; only valid together with format:"csv". Field names are validated against the item schema of the operation's response — an unknown name fails with the list of allowed fields. Default: every top-level scalar field of the item.
formatNoOutput format: "csv" renders the items as RFC 4180 CSV (a leading "# coverage:" comment line, then the header row) instead of JSON — cheaper for wide exports. Default: JSON.
statusNoFilter by collection status (default: both ACTIVE and INACTIVE).
per_pageNoItems per page, 1-100 (default 25). Values outside the range are clamped.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.6.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / fields
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "CSV columns; only valid together with format:\"csv\". Field names are validated against the item schema of the operation's response — an unknown name fails with the list of allowed fields. Default: every top-level scalar field of the item.",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "minItems": 1,
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / format
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Output format: \"csv\" renders the items as RFC 4180 CSV (a leading \"# coverage:\" comment line, then the header row) instead of JSON — cheaper for wide exports. Default: JSON.",
+  "enum": [
+    "csv"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv1.3.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses important behavior: the response includes a coverage envelope, and coverage:"partial" MUST be reflected in user-facing answers, forbidding claims of completeness. This is a critical behavioral constraint an agent would not know from annotations or schema alone.

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 description is three sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose, adds a concise definition of collections, and ends with an essential operational warning about partial coverage. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description helpfully explains the coverage envelope and the partial-coverage rule. It could go slightly further by indicating what fields collection items contain or explicitly directing to get_collection for a single collection, but the current level is sufficient for a filtered-list tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, though it does set the general pagination context that relates to page, per_page, and all.

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 description uses a specific verb and resource: 'List collections of the store (paginated).' It goes beyond the name by explaining what a collection is and distinguishing STATIC vs DYNAMIC collections, making it clearly distinct from sibling tools like get_collection, create_collection, and manage_collection_cards.

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 listing scope clear and provides context about pagination and coverage, but it does not explicitly name alternatives such as get_collection for retrieving a single collection. The usage is implied rather than explicitly contrasted with sibling tools.

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