Skip to main content
Glama

Sliq

by com.getsliq
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List Agency Clients

list_agency_clients
Read-only

The client accounts the caller works as an agency, their own and their teammates', with each client's credit balance and Slack reply alerts and each person's LinkedIn sending state. Pass the email of a member of any group but 'team' as on_behalf_of on a Sliq tool to run that call in that client's account.

Returns {'groups': [{'key', 'name', 'operator_email', 'members': [{'email', 'display_name', 'linkedin'}], 'credits': {'available', 'level' (0 ok, 1 low, 2 almost out)} | None, 'reply_alerts'}, ...]}. The first group (key 'team') is the caller's own team, with operator_email and reply_alerts None. On every other group operator_email is the client's main operator, and reply_alerts is which of the members' LinkedIn replies post to the agency's Slack channel: 'all', 'interested' (a reply classified interested or meeting booked, or any reply from a prospect already at meeting booked), or 'off'. A member's linkedin is None when they have no LinkedIn account connected, else {'linkedin_reason' ('needs_reconnect' | 'auto' paused by LinkedIn limits until linkedin_until | 'manual' paused by the user | None sending), 'linkedin_until', 'connection_request_until' (connection requests alone held until then, or None)}. A caller who works no clients gets {'groups': []}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
on_behalf_ofNoAn agency client's email, from list_agency_clients, to run this call in that client's account: their agents, settings, connected accounts, and credits. Omit it to act on your own account.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / on_behalf_of
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "An agency client's email, from list_agency_clients, to run this call in that client's account: their agents, settings, connected accounts, and credits. Omit it to act on your own account."
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only carry readOnlyHint=true. The description far exceeds that, disclosing the full return shape, the special meaning of the first 'team' group (operator_email and reply_alerts are None), the reply_alerts enum semantics, the linkedin pause reasons and their timestamps, and the no-clients edge case. This is rich behavioral context beyond what structured fields provide.

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?

The description is dense and long, but the length is largely earned because no output schema exists and the nested return structure must be conveyed. The purpose is front-loaded, though the embedded return-schema prose is somewhat wall-of-text and could be better organized.

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?

With no output schema and only one parameter, the description carries the full burden of return-value documentation and does so exhaustively, including group structure, field meanings, enums, None cases, and the empty-result case. Nothing an agent needs to interpret the response is missing.

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% and the single `on_behalf_of` parameter is fully documented in the schema itself, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description reinforces the parameter's role by tying it to list_agency_clients output, but adds no syntax or constraint detail beyond the 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?

States a specific verb and resource: the client accounts the caller works as an agency, both their own and their teammates'. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_teammates and list_agents, and the agent knows exactly what population will be returned.

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?

Gives concrete usage context by explaining how the returned emails are consumed: pass a member's email (from any group but 'team') as `on_behalf_of` on another Sliq tool to act in that client's account. It does not spell out an explicit when-not-this-tool condition versus alternatives, so it falls just short of a 5.

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

All Sliq 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