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 establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds the return field list, the 'active' scope, and the caller-specific nature, enriching context beyond the annotations without 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?
Three sentences, each with a distinct purpose: purpose, return shape, and usage. No filler or redundancy; the main verb is 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?
For a simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return fields, and usage context sufficiently. Combined with annotations and schema, the tool is fully described.
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% for the single parameter, with a full description already. The description's mention of 'active' subscriptions complements the include_inactive parameter but does not add new parameter semantics beyond the schema.
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 a specific verb ('List') and resource ('the caller's active subscriptions'), and explicitly enumerates return fields, clearly distinguishing this from sibling subscribe/unsubscribe tools.
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: to review what you're monitoring before adding more, and to find an ID to cancel. It does not explicitly name alternative tools but implies subscribe/unsubscribe, so no exclusions are stated.
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 are nearly interchangeable: ask_pipeworx_beta is explicitly identical to ask_pipeworx right now, bet_research overlaps heavily with polymarket_edges and polymarket_arbitrage, and ai_visibility_check vs scan_competitor_ai_presence blur together. Despite detailed descriptions, an agent can easily misselect among these overlapping purpose boundaries.
Most names follow a readable verb_noun snake_case pattern (list_countries, search_stations, resolve_entity), but bare verbs like remember/recall/forget and inconsistent prefixes (pipeworx_feedback vs ask_pipeworx, bet_research outside the polymarket_* family) break the pattern. The naming is mixed but still navigable.
35 tools is well into the heavy range, and only 4 of them (get_top_stations, list_countries, list_tags, search_stations) pertain to the server's stated 'radio' purpose. The rest form a sprawling research/prediction-market toolkit, making the server feel like multiple unrelated products fused into one.
The radio subset covers basic discovery but misses station detail, genre filtering, and stream URLs, an obvious gap for the named domain. The broader Pipeworx/Polymarket suite is expansive with discovery and grounding tools, but remains uneven with no direct per-source browsing and only read-only prediction-market access.