search_localtry_featuresSearch the authenticated business's live LocalTry capability registry before choosing an action. Returns exact pages, actions, agents, integrations, additions, inputs, outputs, and persistence behavior without exposing secrets.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| kind | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| query | 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 declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: it queries the 'live' capability registry and promises 'without exposing secrets.' This gives the agent an important trust/security boundary.
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, front-loaded sentence that states the core purpose immediately. The long list of return types is slightly dense but each item is meaningful, and there is no filler or repetition of the tool name.
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?
With no output schema, the description does explain the categories of returned data and the no-secrets rule, which is helpful. However, it omits practical invocation details such as query syntax, kind value guidance, limit behavior, and response structure, leaving an agent with a moderate gap when calling the tool.
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 0%, so the description must compensate, but it does not directly explain the query, kind, or limit parameters. The mention of 'pages, actions, agents, integrations' loosely maps to the kind enum, but the agent is left to infer how to construct a valid query or how limit affects results.
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 'Search' with a specific resource, 'the authenticated business's live LocalTry capability registry', and enumerates exactly what is returned. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like search_crm (CRM records) and run_localtry_command (executing commands).
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 phrase 'before choosing an action' provides clear contextual timing, implying this tool is a discovery step. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is sufficient for an agent to understand the intended slot in a workflow.
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.
Several tools overlap in purpose: get_workspace_overview and search_localtry_features both return feature/capability catalogs, and get_workspace_customization_status/list_workspace_versions overlap with customization history. run_localtry_command also acts as a generic catch-all that could subsume most of the specific action tools, making selection ambiguous.
Most tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (get_*, search_*, create_*, run_*, list_*, restore_*, request_*). Minor deviations like create_or_update_crm_record and run_localtry_command introduce slight inconsistency, but the overall convention is predictable.
With 12 tools, the server is well-scoped for a platform that covers CRM, workflow agents, workspace customization, and feature discovery. Each tool addresses a distinct functional area without excessive fragmentation.
The surface covers the main workflows: CRM upsert/search, workflow agent creation and execution, customization request/status/version restore, and feature discovery. Some lifecycle gaps exist (no delete CRM record, no update/delete agent or workflow), but the generic run_localtry_command can partially compensate.