list_subscriptionsList the caller's active subscriptions. Returns id, type, params, created_at, last_fired_at, fire_count for each. Use this to review what you're monitoring before adding more or to find an id to cancel.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| include_inactive | No | Include cancelled subscriptions in the response (default false). |
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, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. Description adds return field details, confirming read-only behavior. No contradiction.
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?
Two sentences: one for purpose, one for usage. No unnecessary words. Front-loaded with key information.
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?
Simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema. Description covers purpose, usage, and return fields adequately.
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 provides full coverage for the single parameter `include_inactive` with description. The tool description adds no additional parameter info. Baseline 3 applies.
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?
Clearly states verb+resource: 'List the caller's active subscriptions' and lists return fields. Distinguishes from siblings like subscribe/unsubscribe.
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?
Provides explicit use cases: 'review what you're monitoring before adding more or to find an id to cancel'. Lacks explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use, but context is clear.
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.
There is substantial overlap among the question-routing tools: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are explicitly identical right now, and ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, and validate_claim all funnel natural-language queries into similar source lookups. ai_visibility_check and scan_competitor_ai_presence also cover nearly the same capability, making tool selection genuinely ambiguous.
All names are snake_case and many follow a verb_noun pattern (census_exports, list_subscriptions, validate_claim), but the convention drifts with noun-first names like entity_profile, pipeworx_trending, and recent_alerts, and bare verbs like remember, recall, forget, and subscribe. It is readable but not a tight, predictable pattern.
35 tools is too many for a server named 'Census Trade' when only 4 of them actually relate to Census trade data. The remaining 31 form an unrelated general-purpose data, prediction-market, memory, and subscription toolkit, making the surface feel bloated and badly scoped relative to the server's apparent purpose.
The Census trade core covers exports, imports, trade balance, and monthly trends, which handles the central queries, but there is no HS-code catalog, country metadata, or state/port-level breakdown, leaving notable gaps for a trade-data domain. If judged as the broad Pipeworx gateway it appears to actually be, coverage is richer, but that contradicts the server name and weakens overall coherence.