Skip to main content
Glama

Digital Manager Guru

by io.github.mcp-dir

guru_subscriptions_write_set_installment

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_installment]

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?

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds bulk support via 'ids' and confirms it is a mutation. However, it lacks specifics about side effects, required data structure, or reversibility, adding minimal value beyond what annotations already convey.

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 cluttered with a long list of unrelated actions, making it verbose and confusing for the specific tool. It would be better to focus solely on the set_installment action.

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?

For a mutation tool with four parameters and no output schema, the description does not explain what 'set_installment' does, what data is expected, or any constraints. This is grossly incomplete for an agent to use effectively.

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_installment (id + data)' and 'Bulk support: accepts ids', providing some semantics for id, data, and ids. However, it does not explain the 'data' object contents or the 'account' parameter, and with 0% schema coverage, this is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 is a generic mutation template listing many actions, but it does not specifically explain what 'set_installment' does. It only mentions 'set_installment (id + data)' without detailing its effect, making it hard to differentiate from sibling tools like set_current_offer or change_plan.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives. The description simply states it is for mutations and lists actions, with no context on prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions.

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