mcp-server

create_marketplace

Create a new marketplace integration for a project from one of the channels in list_marketplace_channels. channel_code is the channelCode from list_marketplace_channels. Returns {integrationId, action:'create', status, kind:'marketplace', editUrl, nextStepType, message}. status is 'created' (the marketplace exists; continue with configure_marketplace_step starting at nextStepType) or 'prerequisite_not_met' (HTTP 409 — message explains what must be done first, e.g. an offer/primary feed must exist first, a plan limit is reached (the message carries the upgrade link — see PLANS, ADDONS & UPGRADES), or the primary channel must be created first — see nextStepType). primary_sync marks this as the primary product source; order_sync enables order synchronization if the channel supports it; multichannel_code links a multichannel definition when the channel offers one (see get_marketplace_channel). definition_code picks a SPECIFIC definition of the channel when it has more than one (e.g. Amazon/Kaufland expose 'Offers' AND 'New Products') — take it from get_marketplace_channel definitions[].definitionCode; OMIT it to create the channel's default/primary definition. (versionType primary/secondary in get_marketplace_channel tells the definitions apart; it is NOT the same as primary_sync, which just marks this integration as the primary product source.) name is an OPTIONAL human-readable label so you can later find this marketplace by name (names are not unique — set_marketplace_name can change it later). project_id is OPTIONAL (inferred for a single-project customer; if project_id_required is returned, call list_projects).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Optional human-readable name for the new marketplace.
`order_sync`	No	Enable order synchronization (only if the channel supports it).
`project_id`	No
`channel_code`	Yes	channelCode of the marketplace channel (from list_marketplace_channels).
`primary_sync`	No	Mark this marketplace as the primary product source.
`definition_code`	No	Pick a specific definition (definitionCode from get_marketplace_channel) when the channel has more than one, e.g. New Products vs Offers; omit for the default/primary definition.
`multichannel_code`	No	Definition code of a multichannel option when the channel offers one.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral details: status can be 'created' or 'prerequisite_not_met' with HTTP 409 semantics, the message can explain required prerequisites and upgrade links, and the definition_code/versionType behavior is clarified. It also explains optional project_id inference and the distinction between primary_sync and versionType, which the annotations alone would not convey.

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 long and dense, but every clause carries operational detail and the core purpose is front-loaded. Some parenthetical interruptions and repeated clarifications make it read as a wall of text, so bullet structure could improve scannability, but there is no filler language.

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 seven parameters, one required field, no output schema, and sparse annotations, the description is unusually complete: it covers return fields, status semantics, prerequisite handling, upgrade links, next-step routing, optional parameters, and how to resolve missing project_id. An agent has almost everything needed to call the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although schema description coverage is 86%, the description adds substantial meaning: it ties channel_code directly to list_marketplace_channels, explains how definition_code is sourced and when to omit it, disambiguates primary_sync from versionType, describes name uniqueness and rename behavior, and explains project_id inference. These additions go well beyond the schema descriptions, especially for project_id, which has no schema 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 opens with a specific verb–resource pair: 'Create a new marketplace integration for a project,' and immediately scopes the channel source to list_marketplace_channels. It also clarifies exactly what is created and what the expected status outcomes are, distinguishing it from sibling create tools like create_ad and create_feed. The return shape and follow-up flow make the tool's role unmistakable.

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 gives strong workflow guidance: where to get channel_code, where to get definition_code, when to call list_projects, and how to proceed with configure_marketplace_step after creation. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives like clone_marketplace or configure_marketplace_step, so it stops 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 mcp-server 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

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Tools are organized around distinct resources (ads, marketplaces, feeds, orders, rules, sources) with clear action verbs, and descriptions explicitly disambiguate near-pairs like get_feed_status vs ad_status or set_feed_filter vs set_feed_attribute_filter. A few similarly named status/action pairs (e.g. ad_status vs get_ad, run_ad_item_action vs run_ad_operation) require careful reading, but overall the purposes are separable.

Naming Consistency4/5

The overwhelming majority follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (list_*, get_*, create_*, set_*, run_*, test_*). Minor deviations like ad_status and marketplace_status (noun-based status tools) and koongo_knowledge break the pattern slightly, but the convention is clearly recognizable and predictable.

Tool Count1/5

At 105 tools, the surface is extreme and far beyond the 50+ threshold, even for a complex e-commerce integration domain. Much of the bloat comes from systematic triplication across ads, marketplaces, and feeds (e.g. three nearly identical map_*_attribute tools, three list_*_items, three get_*_report) that a generic resource parameter could have consolidated.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers the full lifecycle of feeds, ads, marketplaces, order connections, rules, and imports, including create/read/update/delete, status monitoring, item-level actions, validation, repair, and restore. Minor gaps exist, such as no delete for standalone order connections and limited update capabilities for some entities, but these are workable and do not create dead ends for the core workflows.

Resources

Need Help?