GotCashback

Search portals by name

get_portals_by_name

Read-onlyIdempotent

Searches cashback portals by name (e.g. 'Rakuten', 'TopCashback', 'Honey') and returns each match with its payout terms, one entry per country the portal operates in. Use it when the user asks about a named portal: its sign-up bonus, minimum payout, how often it pays, or which payout methods it offers. For a store's cashback rate at that portal, call get_cashback_rates_by_store_name and read the 'portal' field of each rate instead. Each portal includes its payout terms for that country: 'sign_up_bonus' (amount and the url that grants it, null when none), 'minimum_payout' with 'minimum_payout_currency' (smallest balance paid out, null when not published, 0 means no minimum), 'payment_frequency' (how often it pays, e.g. 'On demand', 'Weekly', 'Monthly'), and 'payment_methods' (payout options, e.g. 'PayPal', 'Direct deposit', 'Check', 'Gift card'). Use these to answer questions about a portal's sign-up bonus, payout threshold, payment schedule and payment options. When mentioning a sign-up bonus, show its 'url' as a clickable link — the bonus is only credited when the user signs up through it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`portal_name`	Yes	The cashback portal name as users say it, e.g. 'Rakuten', 'TopCashback', 'Honey', 'Quidco'. Case-insensitive substring match, best match first.
`country_code`	No	Optional. Lowercase ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code that limits results to one country, e.g. 'us' (United States), 'ca' (Canada), 'gb' (United Kingdom — use 'gb', not 'uk'), 'de' (Germany), 'au' (Australia), 'fr' (France). Pass it when the user names a country ('in Canada', 'UK cashback'); omit it to search all supported countries.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`portals`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only, idempotent, and nondestructive. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: one entry per country, whether sign-up bonus exists (null), minimum_payout semantics, and the crucial fact that the bonus URL must be shown as a clickable link because the bonus is only credited through it.

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?

Front-loaded with the main action, use cases, and the key alternative in the first three sentences. It becomes repetitive later ('Use these to answer...' restates the same fields) and spends several sentences re-explaining values that an output schema would already define, so it is not maximally concise.

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 read-only annotations, complete input schema, and output schema, the description supplies the missing context an agent needs: when to call it, which sibling to call instead, per-country result behavior, and output-presentation instructions like linking the sign-up bonus URL.

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 both parameters already have rich descriptions (case-insensitive substring matching, country code formatting, 'gb' not 'uk'). The tool description reinforces use cases but does not add substantive parameter semantics 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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Searches cashback portals by name... returns each match with its payout terms, one entry per country.' It also contrasts with get_cashback_rates_by_store_name, so an agent can separate portal-level terms from store-level cashback rates.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states when to use: 'Use it when the user asks about a named portal: its sign-up bonus, minimum payout, how often it pays, or which payout methods it offers.' It also gives the exclusion: for a store's cashback rate, call get_cashback_rates_by_store_name instead.

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

All GotCashback tools Inspect

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

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target a clearly distinct resource and action, and the descriptions carefully cross-reference when to use each one. The main risk is the similar get_stores_by_name, get_cashback_rates_by_store_name, and get_gift_cards_by_store_name names, though their descriptions do a good job of separating identity, cashback rates, and gift cards.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming follows a mostly consistent get_<resource>_by_<selector> pattern with clear verb prefixes for mutations like set, remove, and toggle. Minor inconsistencies exist, such as get_portal_by_id (singular) versus get_portals_by_name (plural), and the get_my_* cluster for account tools.

Tool Count4/5

Eighteen tools is slightly above the ideal 3-15 range, but the count is justified by the breadth of the domain: store comparison, brand and category deals, gift cards, portals, countries, and user account features. Each tool has a distinct purpose, so the set does not feel genuinely bloated.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the main workflows well: finding cashback by store, brand, or category, comparing gift cards and portls, browsing countries and stores, and managing favorites, alrts, and profile. Minor gaps exist, such as no direct way to rank all stores in a country by cashback rate without per-store lookups, but agents can work around these.

Resources

Need Help?