list_doc_pagesReturn the title, description, section, URL and Markdown URL of every page this site publishes. Use it to see the shape of the documentation before reading a page.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| section | No | Limit to one section: Site, Documentation or Writing. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| count | Yes | ||
| pages | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark this as read-only, and the description adds useful behavioral context: it returns every published page's metadata and is explicitly intended for broad orientation. It does not mention pagination or limits, but the output schema covers return shape and readOnlyHint covers safety.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two concise sentences: the first states exactly what is returned, and the second gives the intended usage. No filler or redundant wording.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read-only list tool with a fully described optional parameter and an output schema, the description is complete. The sibling context and annotations cover the remaining selection and safety considerations.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The optional 'section' parameter is fully documented in the schema with its allowed values, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('every page this site publishes') while naming the exact fields included. It also signals its role versus siblings like get_doc_page and search_docs: it shows the shape of the docs before reading any page.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description gives clear context: use this tool to see the overall documentation structure before reading a page. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the intended use case is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct role: listing all docs, searching docs, fetching one doc page, retrieving the latest release, listing managed MCP tools, and listing supported agents. The two product-listing tools are separated by subject matter, and the three documentation tools form an obvious search-list-read flow.
All tool names follow the same lowercase verb_noun pattern: get_, list_, and search_. Multi-word targets like managed_mcp_tools and supported_agents are consistently underscore-separated and readable. There are no mixed conventions or vague action verbs.
Six tools is well-scoped for a documentation and product-information server. It provides enough surface to discover, search, and read documentation while also covering release and compatibility information, without redundant or marginal tools.
The surface covers the complete read-only documetation lifecycle: inventory via list_doc_pages, discovery via search_docs, and content via get_doc_page. It also answers likely product questions about releases and supported agents, with search and list flows feeding directly into page retrieval. No create/upate/delete operations are expected for a docs server.