list_capabilitiesList every Apiguru endpoint with its price, required parameters and supported marketplaces, plus your current access mode, cache and session budget. Free: answers locally with no network request and no charge. Call this before paid tools if you need to plan.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
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?
Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by stating it is free, answers locally with no network request, and avoids any charge, which goes beyond what the annotations convey.
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 compact, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value. It efficiently conveys what the tool lists, that it is free and local, and when to call it.
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?
With an output schema present, no return-format explanation is needed, and the zero-parameter schema leaves no input ambiguity. The description covers purpose, cost behavior, local execution, and usage timing, making it fully sufficient 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 tool has zero parameters, so the description carries no parameter burden; the baseline of 4 applies. The description does not need to explain input semantics since there are none.
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 lists every Apiguru endpoint with price, required parameters, and supported marketplaces, making its purpose unmistakable. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tools by being a free, meta-level capability listing rather than a data retrieval tool.
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 explicitly advises calling this tool before paid tools when planning is needed, giving clear usage context. It does not enumerate when-not-to-use cases or name alternative tools, but the guidance is sufficiently clear for an agent to choose it appropriately.
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 target clearly distinct resources—product details, reviews, offers, sellers, deals—and the batch/meta tools are obvious. A couple of adjacent tools could be confused (product_details vs offers_stock, or search by seller vs seller_products), but the descriptions are detailed enough to prevent serious misselection.
Names are all snake_case and use readable resource prefixes (product_*, seller_*), but the verb/noun pattern is inconsistent: bare plural nouns (best_sellers, deals), single verbs (search), and compound nouns (offers_stock, product_details_batch) are mixed. It is readable but not a uniform convention.
Twelve tools is a well-scoped size for an Amazon data API. Each tool serves a distinct data-access or meta purpose with no obvious redundancy or bloat.
The toolkit covers the core Amazon data surface: product lookup (single/batch), discovery (search, best sellers, deals), offers/stock, reviews, and seller information. Minor gaps exist—no category-tree endpoint and review pagination is not explicit—but primary agent workflows are covered.