Skip to main content
Glama

braintree

by io.usefulapi

List a customer's subscription activity

braintree_list_subscriptions
Read-only

List a customer's recurring / subscription payment activity. IMPORTANT: Braintree's GraphQL API does NOT expose native Subscription objects (recurring-billing management is still legacy-API only — see braintree/graphql-api issue #1). This tool therefore returns the customer's transactions (the observable evidence of subscription charges) via a TransactionSearchInput scoped to the customer; inspect each node's status/amount/createdAt to trace recurring charges. For full subscription CRUD you must use Braintree's legacy server SDK / REST API.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
firstNoMax transactions to return. Default 50.
customerIdYesGraphQL global Customer ID whose recurring/subscription charges to list.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=true, but the description reveals critical behavioral details: the tool does not access native Subscription objects but instead returns transactions as a workaround. It also mentions the need to inspect status/amount/createdAt for tracking, adding significant transparency 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with the main purpose first, an important caveat in bold caps for emphasis, followed by explanatory details. While slightly longer, it remains focused and informative without unnecessary fluff.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity as a workaround for missing GraphQL subscription support, the description adequately explains what it returns (transactions) and how to interpret them. Combined with full schema coverage, it provides sufficient context for an AI agent, though it could mention pagination or error handling.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Input schema covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. However, the description adds value by explaining that the 'customerId' scopes a TransactionSearchInput, which is not in the schema, enhancing the understanding of how the parameter is used.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool lists a customer's recurring/subscription payment activity, specifying it uses transactions due to API limitations. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like braintree_find_transaction which retrieves a single transaction, making the purpose specific and differentiated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context on when to use this tool for reading subscription activity via transactions, and advises that full subscription CRUD requires legacy SDK. While it doesn't explicitly list when not to use it, the context is sufficient for an AI agent to infer usage boundaries.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All braintree toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are largely distinct, covering customers, payment methods, transactions, and subscriptions. However, 'list_subscriptions' uses transactions as a proxy, causing potential overlap with 'search_transactions' for customer-scoped searches.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent 'braintree_verb_noun' pattern (e.g., find_customer, search_transactions, refund_transaction). Verbs are sensible and uniform, making the set predictable.

Tool Count5/5

With 7 tools, the server is well-scoped for a payment gateway. It covers core transaction and customer lookups, plus refund/void operations, without excessive bloat.

Completeness3/5

The set lacks essential CRUD operations like creating or updating customers, payment methods, or transactions. Subscriptions are only partially covered via a workaround, leaving notable gaps for a complete workflow.

Resources