Skip to main content
Glama

PlanExe

by io.github.PlanExeOrg

plan_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

List the most recent plans for an authenticated user. Returns up to limit plans (default 10, max 50) newest-first, each with plan_id, state, progress_percentage, created_at (ISO 8601), and a prompt_excerpt (first 100 chars). Use this to recover a lost plan_id or to review recent activity.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of plans to return (1–50). Newest plans are returned first.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
plansYesPlans for the authenticated user, newest first.
messageYesHuman-readable summary (e.g. how many plans were returned).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / $defs / PlanListItem / properties / state / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "pending",
-  "processing",
-  "completed",
-  "failed"
-]New value: +[
+  "pending",
+  "processing",
+  "completed",
+  "failed",
+  "stopped"
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, but the description adds valuable behavioral details: return fields, newest-first ordering, default/max limit, and 100-character excerpt. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences with no fluff. Key purpose is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds practical use cases. Every word earns its place.

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 simple list tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description is complete. It covers purpose, return format, limit behavior, and use cases, leaving no critical gaps.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already describes the limit parameter with default, min, max, and 'newest first' behavior. The description reiterates this without adding significant new meaning, so baseline 3 applies.

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 clearly states the tool lists recent plans for an authenticated user, with specific resource and scope. It also distinguishes from siblings like plan_create and plan_status by focusing on listing/recovering recent activity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit usage guidance is provided: 'Use this to recover a lost plan_id or to review recent activity.' This tells the agent when to use it and implies alternatives for other operations.

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

All PlanExe toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct, non-overlapping purpose within the PlanExe workflow. For example, example_plans and example_prompts serve different preparatory functions, while plan_create, plan_status, plan_stop, plan_resume, and plan_retry handle distinct lifecycle stages of plan generation. No tools appear to duplicate functionality, making selection clear for an agent.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names follow a highly consistent verb_noun pattern throughout, with all tools using snake_case and clear action-object pairs (e.g., plan_create, plan_status, plan_stop). The naming is predictable and readable, with no deviations in style or convention across the set.

Tool Count5/5

With 11 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose of generating and managing strategic project plans. Each tool serves a specific role in the workflow, from preparation (example_prompts, model_profiles) to creation (plan_create), monitoring (plan_status), lifecycle management (plan_stop, plan_resume, plan_retry), and feedback (send_feedback). The count is appropriate and avoids bloat or gaps.

Completeness5/5

The tool set provides complete coverage for the plan generation domain, including CRUD-like operations (create, list, status, stop, resume, retry) and supporting functions (examples, model selection, file retrieval, feedback). There are no obvious gaps; agents can handle the entire lifecycle from prompt drafting to plan retrieval and error recovery without dead ends.

Resources