subfeed_discover_entities
Browse or search the public entity directory. No auth required.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max results (default 20) | |
| offset | No | Pagination offset | |
| search | No | Search by name or description |
Browse or search the public entity directory. No auth required.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max results (default 20) | |
| offset | No | Pagination offset | |
| search | No | Search by name or description |
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?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that no auth is required, which is useful, and 'browse or search' implies a read operation. However, it does not mention pagination behavior, result format, or any other behavioral traits.
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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It clearly communicates the core function and auth requirement.
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?
Given the presence of sibling tools like subfeed_list_entities, the description could be more complete by explaining the unique value of 'discover' vs 'list'. With no output schema, return values are not described, but this is a simple browse/search tool with optional parameters. Overall, it is adequate but has clear gaps.
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?
Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for limit, offset, and search. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only implying the search functionality via 'browse or search'. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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 states the tool browses or searches the public entity directory, which is a clear verb+resource. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from the sibling tool 'list_entities', leaving some ambiguity about the difference between discovering and listing entities.
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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'No auth required' which is a security contextual note, but offers no exclusions or alternative tool references for cases like listing all entities vs searching.
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.
Each tool targets a clear, distinct operation: entity CRUD, addon management, discovery, interaction, and registration. While chat, invoke, and webhook all involve communication, their descriptions clearly differentiate entity chat from public invocation and webhook payloads.
All tools share the 'subfeed_' prefix and use snake_case, with most following a verb_noun pattern (create_entity, delete_entity, list_addons). A few use bare verbs (chat, invoke, register) or noun-only (webhook), but the pattern is still recognizable and predictable.
15 tools is at the upper edge of the ideal range, but it matches the server's broad scope covering entities, addons, models, discovery, and user registration. Each tool serves a distinct purpose and none feel redundant.
The surface covers full entity lifecycle (create, get, update, delete, publish), addon management (enable, disable, list), entity discovery, and user registration. Minor gaps like an explicit unpublish or webhook management can be worked around via update_entity or standalone webhook sending.