Skip to main content
Glama

Digital Manager Guru

by io.github.mcp-dir

guru_subscriptions_write_set_current_offer

Mutações em assinaturas Guru. Ações: cancel (id, +data opcional); cancel_at_cycle_end (id); add_coupon (id + data); remove_coupon (id); set_current_offer (id + data); set_next_offer (id + data); set_cycle_end_date (id + data); set_trial_end_date (id + data); set_installment (id + data); change_plan (id + data); simulate_plan (id + data); set_payment_types (id + data); set_increment_discount (id + data); remove_increment_discount (id).

[Flattened action: set_current_offer]

Bulk support: accepts ids for batched execution.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
idsNo
dataNo
accountNo

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

D1.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description states it is a mutation and supports bulk execution (accepts multiple ids), which adds minimal behavioral context beyond annotations. However, it does not describe side effects, requirements, or what happens to existing data. The annotations already indicate it is not read-only, and the description adds no meaningful disclosure beyond that.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a verbose list of all subscription write actions, most of which are irrelevant to the specific tool. It is not front-loaded with the core purpose and contains extraneous content. The 'flattened action' note is ambiguous and does not improve clarity. The structure wastes space on non-essential information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (4 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description is severely incomplete. It lacks any explanation of what set_current_offer does, what data should be provided, what the outcome is, or any usage constraints. The description is essentially a template for a generic write tool and fails to provide sufficient context for an agent to make a correct call.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description mentions 'set_current_offer (id + data),' confirming that id and data are relevant, and notes bulk support via 'ids.' But it does not explain the structure or meaning of the 'data' object, nor does it clarify the relationship between id and ids. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate for the missing parameter semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description identifies that this is a subscription mutation tool, but it does not explain what 'set_current_offer' specifically does. It lists the action name without any definition or distinction from sibling actions like set_next_offer or change_plan. The purpose is only vaguely implied by the tool name and the generic 'Mutações em assinaturas Guru' header.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lists many subscription write actions but does not differentiate their use cases, prerequisites, or when one might be preferred over another. No contextual cues are provided for choosing set_current_offer.

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

All Digital Manager Guru 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

C2.3/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

The tool names themselves are distinct (e.g., guru_subscriptions_get vs guru_subscriptions_activities), but the descriptions for each resource are identical except for a '[Flattened action: X]' tag, listing all possible actions. This repetition can confuse agents into selecting the wrong tool, especially since many tools share the same description body. The naming is clear but the descriptive overlap undermines disambiguation.

Naming Consistency4/5

The majority of tools follow a consistent pattern: guru_<resource>_<action> for reads and guru_<resource>_write_<action> for writes. However, there are outliers like 'authenticate', 'connect', 'marketplace', 'report_bug', etc., which break the pattern. Within the Guru API itself, the naming is highly predictable, but the occasional non-Guru tool reduces overall consistency.

Tool Count1/5

With 101 tools, the server is grossly over-scoped. The API has been fragmented into a separate tool for every action across many resources (e.g., subscriptions alone have 15+ tools). This is far beyond the typical MCP server size and makes the tool list overwhelming and impractical for agents to navigate. The extreme granularity offers no benefit over a smaller, well-organized set.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide range of operations: CRUD for contacts, subscriptions, transactions, products, coupons, webhooks, and more, including write actions like refunds, chargebacks, and subscription modifications. The domain appears well-covered, though some resources lack create operations (e.g., no create subscription) and there are a few gaps like missing explicit update for transactions. Overall, the coverage is thorough for the stated API surface.

Resources