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 provide read-only, idempotent, non-destructive hints. Description adds that it returns specific fields and that it only returns active by default. 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: first states purpose, second gives usage guidance and return fields. Minimal waste, front-loaded.
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?
No output schema but description lists return fields. Covers the single parameter and usage context. Complete for a simple list 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 coverage is 100% with one parameter fully described. Description does not add meaning beyond the schema for the parameter.
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?
Clear verb ('List') and resource ('subscriptions') with scope ('caller's active'). 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?
States when to use: 'to review what you're monitoring before adding more or to find an id to cancel.' Implies not for adding/cancelling but no explicit when-not or alternatives.
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.
Most tools have distinct purposes, but the three ask_pipeworx variants (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded) could cause confusion despite detailed descriptions. Other tools like defi_chain_tvl and defi_tvl_protocols are well differentiated.
Tool names use a mix of snake_case and descriptive phrases (e.g., defi_chain_tvl vs resolve_entity). No consistent verb_noun pattern; some are imperative verbs (subscribe, forget), others are nouns (bet_research). Still readable but not uniform.
37 tools is high for a single server, but the server covers an unusually broad domain (DeFi, SEC, FDA, economics, prediction markets, etc.). Each tool has a specific role, but the meta-tools (discover_tools, suggest_questions) add to the count. Slightly over-scoped but justifiable.
The tool set covers a wide range of data sources and operations: lookup, comparison, monitoring, feedback, and meta-discovery. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct DeFi transaction tools, no batch processing), but for a data-gathering server it is fairly complete.