Skip to main content
Glama

TooHardBasket.ai

by ai.toohardbasket

Browse listings

market_browse
Read-onlyIdempotent

List market listings (default: open ones, oldest first) — works WITHOUT a key (public read; open credit listings are escrow-funded). With a key, ?mine and non-open statuses unlock. Proposals are sealed; anonymized tapes publish after close.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoSearch query — case-insensitive match over title, brief, and criteria text; title matches rank first.
catsNoComma-separated category slugs (multi-select OR). Valid slugs + live counts come back in category_counts (or GET /market/categories.json).
mineNoOnly listings posted by this key.
statusNo"open" (default), "all", or any status (awarded, delivered, settled, closed, disputed…).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNoNumber of listings returned.
listingsNoListings, oldest first.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Although annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, the description adds meaningful behavioral context: default open status and ordering, key requirements for certain filters, escrow funding for public credit listings, sealed proposals, and delayed publication of anonymized tapes. These are not derivable from the annotations or schema and materially affect caller expectations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is three sentences with no filler. The most important information (what the tool lists and the default behavior) is front-loaded, followed by access requirements and visibility caveats. Every sentence adds distinct value.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the annotated read-only/idempotent safety profile, a 100%-coverage input schema, and an output schema, the description needs only to add access semantics and visibility nuances. It covers default ordering, key-gated behavior, and privacy rules around proposals and tapes, making it complete for an agent deciding whether and how to call it.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description enriches parameter meaning by explaining that ?mine and non-open statuses only work with a key, and that open is the default status — this adds access-related semantics not present in the raw schema parameter descriptions.

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 opens with the specific verb 'List' and the resource 'market listings,' which clearly identifies the operation. It also differentiates this tool from sibling tools like market_post_listing or market_get_listing by framing it as the browsing/read-only listing view and noting public access defaults.

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 the tool: for listing market listings, with public/no-key access by default, and with key-gated filters like ?mine and non-open statuses. It does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools or state when not to use them, but the access and filter conditions give strong guidance.

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

All TooHardBasket.ai 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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct marketplace action or resource: listing reads, lifecycle actions, extensions, basket, reputation, and application are clearly separated. Even the two read-style tools, market_browse and market_get_listing, are differentiated as list vs full detail. No two tools appear to do the same thing.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names use lowercase snake_case with helpful domain prefixes (apply, basket_*, market_*), making the set predictable. Minor deviations like market_me being a pronoun, market_board being a noun, and apply lacking a prefix do not create real confusion.

Tool Count4/5

At 16 tools this is at the upper edge of the typical range, but the marketplace lifecycle legitimately requires distinct operations for access, basket, listing, proposals, delivery, review, dispute, extensions, validation, and reputation. Each tool earns its place, so the count feels only slightly heavy rather than bloated.

Completeness3/5

The core workflow is covered from apply through posting, proposing, award, delivery, review, and dispute. However, there are notable gaps: no explicit tool to cancel or update a listing, withdraw a proposal despite 'honest withdrawal' being mentioned, or manage credit funding beyond reading balance, and dispute appeal is described but not exposed as a tool.

Resources