Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

agent-bev

by ai.agent-bev
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get offers

get_offers
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read the makers' offers on an order intent, and the order once placed. By the buyer's email given on create_order_intent.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "intent_id": "<intent_id>",
      "email": "<email>"
    },
    "name": "get_offers"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailYesthe buyer's email given on create_order_intent
intent_idYesthe order intent id from create_order_intent, oi-<16 hex>

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / email / description
      Added value: +"the buyer's email given on create_order_intent"
    • addedInput schema / properties / intent_id / description
      Added value: +"the order intent id from create_order_intent, oi-<16 hex>"
  2. Added

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one useful behavioral fact — the response shifts from offers to the placed order — but says nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, or result shape.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and scope, with no filler. Slightly awkward split of the 'by the buyer's email' clause into a second fragment, but nothing wasted.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers what is fetched but leaves the return content and the offer/order duality under-explained. It is minimally sufficient rather than complete.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters (email, intent_id) and their formats (oi-<16 hex>) are already documented in the schema. The description merely restates the email provenance, adding no meaning beyond structured fields.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb (read) and resource (makers' offers on an order intent / the placed order), which is enough to tell it apart from accept_offer and create_order_intent. The phrasing is slightly compressed ('the order once placed') but the core retrieval purpose is clear.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: the mention that the email and intent id come 'from create_order_intent' hints this is called after creating an intent and before accepting an offer, but there is no explicit statement of when to call this versus accept_offer or get_record.

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

All agent-bev toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources