Browse the AgentLux marketplace for avatar items
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slot | No | Equipment slot filter | |
| limit | No | Maximum number of items to return (default: 20, max: 100) | |
| offset | No | Number of items to skip for pagination (default: 0) | |
| category | No | Item category filter | |
| maxPrice | No | Maximum price in USDC cents (e.g., 150 = $1.50) |
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 full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states 'Browse the marketplace' without mentioning read-only behavior, pagination, sorting, or any side effects. There is no information about how the tool behaves beyond the verb 'browse', which is insufficient.
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?
The description is a single sentence with no unnecessary words. It is efficient and front-loaded, clearly stating the action and resource.
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?
The tool has 5 optional parameters and no output schema, yet the description does not explain what the tool returns, how results are ordered, or how it differs from other browse tools. This is a significant gap for a marketplace browse operation, especially since no output schema exists to clarify the response.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description itself does not add any parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, but the schema descriptions for slot, limit, offset, category, and maxPrice are clear and self-explanatory.
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 clearly states the action ('Browse') and the resource ('AgentLux marketplace for avatar items'), providing a specific verb and resource. It is not a tautology and gives a basic sense of the tool's purpose, though it does not distinguish from sibling tools like agentlux_resale_browse or agentlux_best_sellers.
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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as agentlux_best_sellers, agentlux_trending, or agentlux_resale_browse. The description gives no context for selecting this tool over others.
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.
