mcp-server

get_value_mapping_inputs

Read-only

Get the inputs needed to build a value-mapping rule (Attribute Rule) that remaps a source attribute's values onto a target attribute's allowed set (e.g. store colours → the channel's accepted colour list). Works for BOTH a feed and a marketplace/ad. This is for value→value MAPPING (the map_attribute_value operation); to just assign ONE fixed value from an attribute's option list (a "Set option") use get_attribute_options instead. Returns {sourceValues:[{value, label}], targetAllowedValues:[{value, label}], alreadyMapped:[{search, replace}], hasMore, nextOffset}. sourceValues are the distinct values of source_attribute_code in the store; targetAllowedValues are the values target_attribute_code accepts on the target; alreadyMapped are the pairs already configured. YOU propose the search→replace pairs from these two lists — this tool runs no AI and never writes. Apply the pairs by adding a map_attribute_value operation (arguments search/replace) to the rule via create_rule / update_rule, then attach the rule (map_feed_attribute / map_marketplace_attribute / map_ad_attribute with rule_id); values you leave unmapped pass through unchanged for the user to finish manually. search/replace on the map_attribute_value op you build from these are arrays of {value:''} objects paired by index (NOT plain strings). Pass only_unmapped:true to get only source values that still need a pair; page with offset (from nextOffset) while hasMore is true. TARGET: pass EXACTLY ONE of feed_id (a feed, from list_feeds) or integration_id (a marketplace/ad — the marketplace_id/ad_id from list_marketplaces / list_ads); integration_id resolves the integration's attributes. The attribute codes come from get_feed / get_marketplace_attributes / get_ad_attributes / list_source_attributes. project_id is OPTIONAL (inferred for a single-project customer; project_id_required otherwise — then call list_projects). This tool returns real store data values only after you set acknowledge_sensitive:true. The first call (flag absent/false) returns {sensitiveGate:{confirmationRequired:true, itemCount, fields, kind}} with the sourceValues / alreadyMapped arrays EMPTY — present that gate to the USER, get their approval, then re-call with acknowledge_sensitive:true to receive the actual values.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`offset`	No	Pagination cursor: pass the previous response's nextOffset to fetch the next page (default 0).
`feed_id`	No	Target a feed (from list_feeds). Pass exactly one of feed_id or integration_id.
`project_id`	No
`only_unmapped`	No	When true, return only source values that still need a search→replace pair (skip already-mapped ones); default false.
`integration_id`	No	Target a marketplace/ad — the marketplace_id or ad_id from list_marketplaces / list_ads. Pass exactly one of feed_id or integration_id.
`acknowledge_sensitive`	No	Set true only AFTER the user approves seeing real data. When absent/false the tool returns a sensitiveGate with sourceValues / alreadyMapped empty; with true it returns the actual values.
`source_attribute_code`	Yes
`target_attribute_code`	Yes

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description reinforces this by stating the tool 'runs no AI and never writes.' It additionally discloses the two-phase sensitive data gate, pagination via hasMore/nextOffset, and that unmapped values pass through unchanged—context well beyond what annotations provide.

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 long but every sentence carries operational weight: purpose, scope, alternative, return shape, parameter targeting, sensitive gate, and follow-up workflow. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and differentiation before diving into parameter details, with no filler.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description enumerates the full response shape including sourceValues, targetAllowedValues, alreadyMapped, hasMore, and nextOffset, and explains the sensitiveGate response. Given the tool's complexity—8 parameters, dual target types, and a sensitive-data gate—the description covers everything an agent needs to call it 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?

With only 63% schema description coverage, the description compensates fully. It explains source_attribute_code as distinct store values, target_attribute_code as accepted target values, the exact semantics of feed_id vs integration_id, project_id inheritance, only_unmapped, acknowledge_sensitive, and offset/nextOffset pagination, plus the non-obvious array-of-objects format for search/replace.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get the inputs needed to build a value-mapping rule' that remaps source values onto a target attribute's allowed set. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling get_attribute_options by contrasting value→value mapping with a single fixed 'Set option' assignment.

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?

The description gives explicit when-to-use guidance for value→value mapping and explicitly points to get_attribute_options as the alternative for a single fixed value. It also explains the follow-up workflow (add map_attribute_value via create_rule/update_rule, then attach via map_feed_attribute/map_marketplace_attribute/map_ad_attribute), leaving no ambiguity about the downstream steps.

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?