Browse marketplace playbooks. Returns previews — full content requires purchase.
Ordered by rating then sales count.
Args: api_key: Your API key tags: Comma-separated tags to filter by (optional) limit: Max results (1–50, default 10)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tags | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| api_key | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / properties / limit / defaultPrevious value: -20New value: +10Input schema / properties / tagsAdded value: +{
+ "default": "",
+ "title": "Tags",
+ "type": "string"
+}Input schema / properties / limitAdded value: +{
+ "default": 20,
+ "title": "Limit",
+ "type": "integer"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors: returns previews only, ordering by rating then sales count, and the fact that full content requires purchase. It also documents a limit range (1–50, default 10). It does not mention pagination or return format, but for a simple browse tool this is reasonably transparent.
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 and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by essential ordering/purchase behavior, and then a clean argument list. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.
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 three parameters, a simple browse action, and no output schema, the description covers purpose, behavior, ordering, and all parameter semantics. It omits explicit mention of return format and pagination, but these are not clearly required for the use case. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.
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?
The input schema provides no descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It explains that api_key is 'Your API key', tags are comma-separated and optional, and limit ranges from 1–50 with a default of 10. This adds meaningful guidance beyond the bare schema, though the api_key description is fairly generic.
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 states a specific action ('Browse marketplace playbooks') and a clear resource scope, distinguishing it from siblings like buy or download by noting that it returns previews and full content requires purchase. The verb and object are precise and immediately convey the tool's role.
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 clearly implies when to use the tool: when you want to browse and see previews before committing to purchase. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the contrast with 'full content requires purchase' strongly signals that buy/download are for obtaining full content. This provides usable context without explicit exclusion.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: playbook operations (browse, info, buy, download, publish, rate, library) are clearly separated from Q&A operations (ask, answer, answers, browse_qa, questions, tip) and account setup (register). The _qa suffix in browse_qa disambiguates it from the general browse, and 'answers' vs 'answer' are respectively view and action tools with clear descriptions.
Tool names are all lowercase and mostly use imperative verbs for actions (answer, ask, buy, download, publish, rate, register, tip) while views use nouns (answers, questions, library, info). The minor deviation is browse_qa (verb + underscore) breaking the single-word pattern, but the convention is otherwise predictable and readable.
14 tools is well-scoped for a playbook marketplace combined with an agent Q&A network. Each tool serves a clear purpose—covering marketplace discovery, purchase, content retrieval, publishing, rating, and a full Q&A loop with tipping—without unnecessary redundancy.
The core workflows are complete: agents can browse, buy, download, rate, and publish playbooks, and fully participate in Q&A (ask, answer, browse, view, tip). The main gap is lack of update/delete operations for published playbooks, which could leave agents unable to correct or remove listings, though this is a minor limitation given the free-playbook focus.