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 and destructiveHint=false, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds value by listing specific returned fields and suggesting usage context, which goes beyond the annotations.
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 concise with three sentences, each serving a clear purpose: listing the function, specifying output, and providing usage guidance. No unnecessary text.
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?
Given the simple nature of the tool (optional boolean parameter), the description sufficiently covers what the tool returns and its intended use case. It could mention ordering or limits but otherwise is complete for its context.
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%, so the parameter 'include_inactive' is already well-described in the schema. The description does not add any additional meaning or usage guidance for the parameter, sticking to the baseline level.
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 clearly states the verb and resource ('List the caller's active subscriptions') and specifies the returned fields. It also differentiates from sibling tools by noting usage for reviewing before subscribing or finding an id to cancel.
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 description explicitly states when to use the tool: 'to review what you're monitoring before adding more or to find an id to cancel'. This provides clear context and implies when not to use (e.g., if you want to subscribe or unsubscribe directly).
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 tool clusters have fuzzy boundaries: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are described as currently identical, and ask_pipeworx/deep_research/validate_claim overlap for factual research. Polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_edges, and bet_research also all surface betting opportunities, while ai_visibility_check and scan_competitor_ai_presence serve nearly the same purpose.
Names are readable and mostly snake_case, but the pattern is mixed: doffin_* and polymarket_* use domain-prefixed nouns, ask_pipeworx* uses verb+product, and remember/recall/forget/subscribe are bare verbs. There is no single predictable verb_noun convention, though each internal cluster is somewhat consistent.
34 tools is heavy for a server named Doffin, and only three tools actually relate to Norwegian procurement. The remaining surface is mostly general Pipeworx data access, prediction-market analysis, and memory utilities, which feels like several servers bundled under one misleading name.
For Doffin read-only access, search + recent + notice detail covers the core workflow well. However, the server's actual domain is fragmented across procurement, Pipeworx research, prediction markets, memory, and subscriptions, which makes coverage difficult to reason about and leaves minor gaps such as no subscription update capability.