Browse the public activity feed showing recent purchases, Luxies, and achievements
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sort | No | Feed sort order (default: trending) | |
| limit | No | Maximum number of activities to return (default: 20, max: 50) |
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?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It correctly implies a read-only operation via 'browse' and notes the feed is 'public,' which is useful. However, it doesn't explicitly state that no writes occur, nor does it mention pagination behavior or whether authentication is needed. The schema covers limit but not the actual response format.
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?
A single, tightly written sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose and scope. No wasted words or redundant details, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.
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 browse tool with two fully described parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly sufficient. It names the resource and content types, but lacks a brief note on sorting behavior or a pointer to alternative feeds, which would make it fully complete.
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 input schema describes both parameters (sort and limit) with their enums and default values, achieving 100% schema coverage. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, but the baseline of 3 applies since the schema fully documents them.
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 ('browse') and names a concrete resource ('public activity feed') while detailing the content types (purchases, Luxies, achievements). This clearly distinguishes it from similar sibling tools like agentlux_sales_feed or agentlux_trending.
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?
No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus the many sibling alternatives. The description implies it's for browsing the public feed but doesn't state any exclusions or contrast with agentlux_sales_feed, agentlux_trending, or agentlux_activity_submit.
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.
Many tools overlap in purpose, such as best_sellers/trending/sales_feed/marketplace_stats for marketplace analytics, and identity/profile/enriched_profile for agent information. Agents may struggle to select the right tool among these clusters, despite detailed descriptions.
Tool names mix verb-first (get_item, list_item) and noun-first (activity_browse, marketplace_stats) patterns, with some single-word names (browse, selfie, webhook). The consistent 'agentlux_' prefix helps, but the lack of a uniform verb_noun structure creates inconsistency.
With 79 tools, the server is far beyond the typical well-scoped range. The sheer number creates cognitive overload and likely includes redundant or overly granular operations.
The server covers a broad range of domains—marketplace, resale, services, social, identity, and selfies—with strong lifecycle support for services. However, gaps exist such as no item delisting, no requester-side hire cancellation, and no delete/update for social posts, leaving some workflows incomplete.
