Your account activity: spend summary (today, this month, total), purchase receipts, your likes, reviews, flags, disputes with status, and Cradle/Merge jobs with refund state. Requires authentication. Use it to re-find previously purchased listings before buying again.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max entries per section (1 to 50). |
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?
The description adds that authentication is required, which is a behavioral trait beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It also lists the types of data returned, giving transparency about the scope of the tool.
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 two sentences, each adding value: first listing returned data, second providing usage guidance. No wasted words.
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?
The description covers the return data comprehensively and mentions authentication. With no output schema, it provides sufficient context for the tool's functionality, though it lacks details on pagination or order.
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 schema coverage is 100% for the single 'limit' parameter, which already has a description. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or details about the parameter 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 clearly states the tool retrieves account activity including spend summary, receipts, likes, reviews, etc. It uses the verb 'get' and the resource 'activity', and the content is distinct from sibling tools like get_listing or get_approval.
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 a specific use case: 'Use it to re-find previously purchased listings before buying again.' It implies when to use but does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternative tools.
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 clearly distinct purposes, but the deprecated tools (list_datasets, list_market_apis, search_datasets, try_dataset) overlap with modern replacements (search_catalog, get_listing). Some functional overlap exists between get_activity and charge_list, but descriptions clarify their scopes. Overall, an agent can usually tell tools apart, with a few legacy remnants.
Tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (browse_catalog, business_start, charge_create, etc.). Even the deprecated tools adhere to the same style. There are no mixed conventions or vague verbs like 'process' or 'run'. The naming is highly predictable.
At 52 tools, this is a large surface. The domain is broad (marketplace buying/selling, business management, policy, storefront, distribution, authentication), so many tools are justifiable. However, four deprecated tools could be pruned, and the count is on the heavy side compared to typical MCP servers. It feels overengineered, yet each tool addresses a distinct facet of the platform.
The toolset covers the full lifecycle: discovery, evaluation, purchase, delivery, feedback, business management, policy, storefront, and distribution. Gaps are minor—for example, no direct way to list all services with full details without service_list, but that exists. The deprecated tools indicate ongoing migration to a consolidated search surface, suggesting good coverage. A few small gaps remain (e.g., no explicit 'update listing' for buyers, but that may not be needed).