mcp-server

list_order_channels

Read-only

List the marketplaces that can be added as a standalone ORDER connection — order-capable channels that do NOT have a product wizard. (Channels that DO have a wizard are added with create_marketplace instead, not here.) Returns {channels:[{channelApiCode, label, channelCode, logoUrl, authType ('oauth'|'api_key'), available}], total}. 'available' is false when the plan's order-connection limit is already reached. Pass a channelApiCode to create_order_connection to start adding one. Optional query filters by name/code. project_id is OPTIONAL (inferred for a single-project customer; project_id_required otherwise — then call list_projects).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	No	Optional filter on channel name/code.
`project_id`	No

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and non-destructive, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context: the 'available' flag reflects the plan's order-connection limit, authType values are disclosed, and the project_id inference behavior is explained. These details go well beyond the structured 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 dense but every sentence carries decision-relevant information: purpose, distinction from alternatives, return shape, field semantics, next-step action, and parameter nuances. Nothing is 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?

Without an output schema, the description fully specifies the return shape and field semantics. It also covers filtering, optionality, edge-case behavior, and the follow-up call to create_order_connection, making it complete for correct tool selection and invocation.

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?

The query parameter is already documented in the schema, and the description reinforces it. The project_id parameter, which lacks schema documentation, is meaningfully clarified with optionality rules and the list_projects fallback, compensating for the partial schema 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?

The description names a specific verb and resource ('List the marketplaces that can be added as a standalone ORDER connection') and immediately distinguishes them from wizard-based channels. It is clearly differentiated from sibling tools like list_marketplaces and create_marketplace.

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?

It explicitly states when to use this tool versus create_marketplace, and gives the decision rule based on whether a channel has a product wizard. It also explains the project_id edge case and routes to list_projects when required, leaving no ambiguity about invocation conditions.

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?