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, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds the return field list and explains the include_inactive parameter, providing context beyond 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?
Two sentences with the main action front-loaded. No wasted words; every sentence serves a purpose.
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 annotations covering safety and idempotency, a simple parameter, and no output schema required, the description fully covers purpose, return values, and usage guidance. Complete for this 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 a good description for the only parameter. The description lists return fields, adding value beyond the schema. Baseline 3, upgraded for return field context.
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 'List the caller's active subscriptions' and lists the returned fields (id, type, params, etc.). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like subscribe and 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?
The description provides explicit usage context: 'Use this to review what you're monitoring before adding more or to find an id to cancel.' It implies use before subscribe/unsubscribe but does not explicitly exclude 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 are distinct, but there are several problematic clusters: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta (which admits it is currently identical to the stable router), and ask_pipeworx_grounded can easily be misselected. The Polymarket tools (bet_research, polymarket_edges, polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_fill_risk) also have fuzzy boundaries around 'find me an edge', and compare_entities/entity_profile/recent_changes all offer one-call company research.
Naming is overwhelmingly lowercase snake_case with a verb-first pattern (ask_, generate_, list_, resolve_, subscribe, recall). Deviations include the md_dmv_ prefix on two tools, the noun-led entity_profile, and bare verbs like forget/remember/recall, but the overall style remains readable and predictable.
33 tools is well into the bloated range for a single server, and the sprawl is worsened by the fact that only 2 of the 33 tools actually relate to the server's stated name, 'Maryland MVA.' The rest form an unrelated Pipeworx data/prediction-market/memory/meta-toolkit that could either be split into separate servers or consolidated behind the universal router.
For the actual Pipeworx domain, coverage is broad: universal routing, grounded answering, deep research, entity profiles, comparisons, claim validation, memory, and subscriptions are all present. However, for the server's apparent purpose — Maryland MVA — coverage is nearly empty: only vehicle registration counts and EV adoption exist, with no driver services, fees, offices, titles, or licensing operations. The direct tool surface also has holes (stock prices, weather, etc.) that only the meta-router papers over.