F
licenseNot graded
qualityB
maintenanceEnables users to compare and get recommendations across multiple supermarket products, combining curated specifications with realtime price and review lookups.
TaskRail
Server Details
Delivered-price deals, cancel/refund paths, used-value comparisons, and compatibility checks.
If you are the author of this connector, you can claim ownership with GitHub, an HTTP challenge, or a DNS record. Claimed connector authors can inspect health checks, view analytics, and manage their listing.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Available Tools
4 toolscheck_products_compatibilityAInspect
Check whether two exact products are compatible. Use for requests like “will this fit,” “does this work with,” “compatible with,” or “is an adapter needed?” It checks identifiers and source-backed specifications for accessories, parts, consumables, chargers, cables, mounts, batteries, computer components, and automotive parts.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| vehicle_vin | No | Optional 17-character VIN for authoritative NHTSA vehicle identification | |
| required_use | No | Optional explanation of the intended use | |
| primary_product | Yes | The product, device, vehicle, or system the candidate must work with | |
| candidate_product | Yes | The accessory, part, consumable, adapter, or component being checked |
Output Schema
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | |
| status | Yes | |
| decision | Yes | |
| freshness | Yes | |
| confidence | Yes | |
| limitations | Yes | |
| source_names | Yes | |
| best_price_usd | No | |
| recommendation | Yes | |
| sources_failed | Yes | |
| sources_checked_count | Yes |
TDQS
A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; description adds that it 'checks identifiers and source-backed specifications,' which enriches understanding of the tool's internal behavior. No contradictions with annotations.
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?
Three sentences efficiently convey purpose, example queries, and scope. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.
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?
For a query tool with output schema present, description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, and what inputs are involved. No gaps given context signals (no enums, no nested objects).
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 provides full coverage (100%) with descriptions for all 4 parameters. Description adds minimal extra meaning beyond schema, meeting baseline for high coverage.
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?
Description uses specific verb 'check' and resource 'products compatibility' with clear examples like 'will this fit' and 'does this work with'. It distinguishes from sibling tools which focus on deals, alternatives, or completion paths.
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?
Explicitly prescribes use cases ('will this fit,' 'compatible with') and lists covered categories (accessories, parts, etc.). Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but siblings are clearly unrelated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
find_best_total_dealAInspect
Find the cheapest price and best deal for an exact new physical product. Use for requests like “where to buy,” “price comparison,” “lowest total cost including shipping,” or “is it in stock?” It resolves the model and variant, checks current offers, shipping, stock, delivery timing, and known mandatory fees.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| product | Yes | Exact product name, model, and variant in the user's own words | |
| postal_code | No | US postal code for delivery price and availability |
Output Schema
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | |
| status | Yes | |
| decision | Yes | |
| freshness | Yes | |
| confidence | Yes | |
| limitations | Yes | |
| source_names | Yes | |
| best_price_usd | No | |
| recommendation | Yes | |
| sources_failed | Yes | |
| sources_checked_count | Yes |
TDQS
A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true; the description adds valuable context about what is checked (offers, shipping, stock, delivery, fees), but does not contradict annotations.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence adds value without redundancy.
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 presence of an output schema and the clear coverage of purpose, triggers, and checks, the description is fully adequate for the tool's complexity.
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 coverage is 100%, and the description adds meaning to the 'product' parameter by specifying it should be 'in the user's own words', going beyond the schema's minimal description.
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 uses a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('cheapest price and best deal') for 'exact new physical product', and lists example queries that clearly distinguish it from sibling tools like find_used_or_refurbished_alternatives.
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 explicitly states use cases ('where to buy', 'price comparison', etc.) and what it resolves (model/variant, offers, shipping), but does not explicitly state when not to use it, relying on context from sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
find_used_or_refurbished_alternativesAInspect
Find where to buy an exact product used, refurbished, or open box and decide whether the cheaper alternative is worth it. Use for requests like “buy used,” “refurbished,” “open box,” “cheaper alternative,” or “is used worth it?” It compares verified used options with the best new price, condition, returns, and warranty.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| product | Yes | Exact product name, model, and variant to buy used or refurbished | |
| postal_code | No | US postal code for delivery price and availability | |
| minimum_savings_percent | No | Minimum savings that would make a used option worthwhile |
Output Schema
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | |
| status | Yes | |
| decision | Yes | |
| freshness | Yes | |
| confidence | Yes | |
| limitations | Yes | |
| source_names | Yes | |
| best_price_usd | No | |
| recommendation | Yes | |
| sources_failed | Yes | |
| sources_checked_count | Yes |
TDQS
A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description goes beyond annotations by explaining that the tool compares verified used options with the best new price, condition, returns, and warranty. It adds behavioral context (e.g., decision-making) that annotations alone do not cover. However, it could mention whether it provides purchase links or external site navigation.
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 concise, with two sentences that front-load the core purpose and provide immediate usage context. No redundant information, every sentence earns its place.
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 parameter count, full schema coverage, presence of an output schema, and sibling tools, the description is complete. It explains the tool's decision aspect and when to invoke it, leaving no obvious gaps for an AI agent.
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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the three parameters clearly. The description does not add significant extra meaning to the parameters; it focuses on the tool's overall function. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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's purpose: finding where to buy an exact product used/refurbished/open box and deciding if the cheaper alternative is worth it. It lists specific example queries and differentiates from sibling tools like find_best_total_deal, which likely focuses on new products.
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 explicit usage guidance with example requests like 'buy used' or 'is used worth it?'. It implies context but does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or compare it to alternatives, which would make it stronger.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_fastest_completion_pathAInspect
Find the fastest official way to complete a practical task. Use for requests like “how do I cancel,” “return an item,” “get a refund,” “file a warranty claim,” or “find the official form.” It returns ordered, source-backed steps and exact official links; it does not log in or submit the action.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| task | Yes | What the user needs to do, in ordinary language | |
| state | No | Optional two-letter US state code when rules or forms vary by state | |
| provider | Yes | Company, agency, service, or organization responsible for the task |
Output Schema
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | |
| status | Yes | |
| decision | Yes | |
| freshness | Yes | |
| confidence | Yes | |
| limitations | Yes | |
| source_names | Yes | |
| best_price_usd | No | |
| recommendation | Yes | |
| sources_failed | Yes | |
| sources_checked_count | Yes |
TDQS
A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Description adds behavioral details beyond annotations: returns ordered steps, exact official links, and does not log in or submit. Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, which are consistent. No contradictions.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and examples immediately follow. No wasted words; every sentence adds value.
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?
Description covers essential behavior, and since the tool has an output schema, return values need not be detailed here. One minor gap: no mention of error handling or rate limits, but acceptable given the tool's simplicity.
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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for all three parameters. Description reinforces that 'task' should be in ordinary language and 'state' is optional US code, but adds no significant new meaning beyond schema.
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?
Description clearly states it finds the fastest official way to complete a practical task, with examples like 'how do I cancel' or 'return an item'. It distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., check_products_compatibility) by focusing on task completion rather than product comparison.
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?
Description explicitly lists example use cases and notes what the tool does not do (log in or submit action). However, it does not specify when alternatives like find_best_total_deal should be used, leaving some ambiguity.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Frequently Asked Questions
Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.
Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as
io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user or an account that owns the GitHub organization, then choose Claim with GitHub.HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at
/.well-known/glama.jsonon the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.
The HTTP ownership file has this structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"claim": "glama_claim_..."
}Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.
If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.
For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
To improve your MCP server's ranking:
Claim ownership of the server listing
Complete the server profile with an accurate description and thumbnail
Provide a test profile so Glama can connect to and evaluate the server
Keep tool definitions clear and complete to earn a high Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS)
Route real usage through the Glama Gateway; more recorded successful server uses also improve the ranking
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Connectors
Which stores can actually ship to your destination, at what real landed cost.
Cross-merchant product search with real price history, comparisons, and demand signals.
Used-Mac market: quality-gated listings with deep links, asking-price stats, trust checks, alerts.
AI-powered product search, affiliate links, and price negotiation for e-commerce platforms
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI agents to create, compare, and track purchases with structured buying workflows, offer comparison, and merchant verification.5MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceSourced product prices, dated price history, specs and independent-test coverage across 4,764 hardware products and 2,064 software vendors — every figure returned with its source URL and the date it was captured. Unknown values come back as null rather than a guess, so an agent can cite what it surfaces.
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceSearches UK electronics products across multiple retailers, compares prices, and provides purchase links.2182MIT
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool covers a distinct purpose: compatibility checking, new product deals, used alternatives, and task procedures. No overlap in functionality, and descriptions clearly differentiate them.
Naming Consistency4/5
All names use snake_case with a verb-noun pattern, e.g., check_products_compatibility, find_best_total_deal. Minor variance in noun phrase length (e.g., find_used_or_refurbished_alternatives is longer) but overall consistent.
Tool Count4/5
With only 4 tools, the set is compact but focused. It covers the core actions for product shopping and task guidance without unnecessary bloat. Could benefit from a broader scope, but count is reasonable for the niche.
Completeness4/5
The tools cover key product lifecycle phases: compatibility, new and used purchasing, and after-sales tasks. Missing general product search or reviews, but the core workflow (compare, buy, complete task) is well-served.