Merchant Catalog Acceptance
Server Details
Deterministic acceptance report for a supplied product catalog: validates price/currency/availabi...
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Available Tools
1 toolmerchant_catalog_acceptanceARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Deterministic acceptance report for a supplied product catalog: validates price/currency/availability/URL formatting, GS1 GTIN checksums, and flags duplicate SKUs, duplicate GTINs, and grouped-variant collisions. Checks only the structured rows given in the request - no network calls, no brand or marketplace certification, no ISO 4217 currency list. Price: 0.05 USDC per completed bounded job on Base.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| products | Yes | ||
| required_attributes | No | Optional list of attribute keys that every row must supply in its attributes map. |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds meaningful behavior: deterministic, no network calls, no certification, pricing (0.05 USDC per job), and that invalid rows are reported as defects rather than rejected. It doesn't detail pagination or exact output shape, but no output schema exists and the deterministic/bounded-job details are useful.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three dense sentences: first states core function, second lists exclusions, third gives pricing. Front-loaded with the main verb and resource, no wasted words, every sentence adds distinct value.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Complete for a deterministic validation tool: it defines what is checked, what is not checked, how bad rows are handled (reported as defects), and the cost. Given no output schema, a bit more detail about return structure could help, but the description already tells the agent what to expect (acceptance report) and the behavioral boundaries are clear.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is low (50% across 2 params are described; the products array items are documented via per-property descriptions). The description summarizes validation scope but does not restate field-level constraints; the schema's per-field descriptions carry the bulk. The description adds the fact that numeric price values are reported as defects, which is extra context beyond the schema, but not enough to raise above baseline 3.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific verb ('validates', 'flags', 'checks') on a specific resource ('supplied product catalog') and enumerates exact validations (GTIN checksums, price/currency/availability formats, duplicate SKU/GTIN, grouped-variant collisions). It clearly distinguishes itself from any certification/network-check tool by explicitly listing what it does NOT do.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description clearly states scope: 'Checks only the structured rows given in the request - no network calls, no brand or marketplace certification, no ISO 4217 currency list.' This gives strong when-to-use/not-use context. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or say 'use this instead of X' because no sibling tools are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
1 tool update
- First observed
merchant_catalog_acceptance
Frequently Asked Questions
Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.
Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as
io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user, then choose Claim with GitHub. An organization namespace such asio.github.acme/serveralso needs that organization to have installed the Glama AI GitHub App and approved its permissions, because GitHub discloses organization membership only to apps it has installed. Use HTTP or DNS when it has not.HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at
/.well-known/glama.jsonon the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.
The HTTP ownership file has this structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"claim": "glama_claim_..."
}Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.
If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.
For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
To improve your MCP server's ranking:
Claim ownership of the server listing
Complete the server profile with an accurate description and thumbnail
Provide a test profile so Glama can connect to and evaluate the server
Keep tool definitions clear and complete to earn a high Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS)
Route real usage through the Glama Gateway; more recorded successful server uses also improve the ranking
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Connectors
Provider-neutral, read-only commerce preflight with UCP/ACP checkout evidence. Never orders.
Verify live product price, currency, stock, variants and published shipping evidence for AI agents.
AI-agent product catalog: search, lookup & purchase routing over verified merchant data.
Product and service specs with per-field confidence, plus dated price offers.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceValidates Excel (.xlsx) workbooks against reviewed, lockable acceptance contracts, catching errors and outputting structured issues that agents can repair.1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceAgent-native Amazon catalog auditing tool that enables AI agents to scan, check, and diff Category Listing Reports and live Seller Central listings via MCP tools.13MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables spec-driven development acceptance gate with structured receipts, audit logs, and reviewer-ready evidence.-
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceValidates electronic invoices (XRechnung, ZUGFeRD, Factur-X, Peppol BIS, etc.) against authority-pinned rules and explains failures.221MIT
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
With only a single tool, there is no possibility of selecting among overlapping tools. The tool's purpose is clearly and uniquely defined within the server.
The tool name 'merchant_catalog_acceptance' is a clear, descriptive snake_case phrase that matches the server name. Despite lacking a verb prefix, consistency is trivially satisfied with just one tool.
A single tool is at the thin end of the typical tool count range. While it fully covers the server's narrow purpose, the server offers no additional operations or flexibility, making it feel minimal.
For its stated scope—validating catalog structured rows—the tool covers all relevant checks: price, currency, availability, URL formatting, GTIN checksums, duplicate SKUs/GTINs, and variant collisions. It explicitly documents exclusions, so there are no hidden dead ends.