Skip to main content
Glama

Moxlade — Upwork buyer intelligence

by com.moxlade

Who the client is

get_buyer
Read-onlyIdempotent

Who is actually behind an anonymous posting.

This is the de-anonymisation: Upwork shows "a client in Germany", and this names the company, with a confidence grade for how sure the match is. Use it before writing a proposal, to know who you are writing to.

upwork_id is the posting's id. A confidence below "high" means the match is a best guess from the posting's own signals — treat it as a lead, not a fact, and say so if you relay it.

Returns null for the company when we hold no match rather than guessing. A null here is an honest "we do not know", never "there is nobody".

Feed-scoped: answers for postings this corpus has shown you — your own search results and saved-search matches. Any other id is refused, with how to bring it into reach.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
upwork_idYesa posting id as search_jobs returns it. Not a URL, and without the leading '~'.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityNoCity, when known.
noteNoPresent when no company matched, explaining what that does and does not mean.
foundNoFalse when the corpus holds no such posting.
domainNoTheir website, when we have matched one.
companyNoThe company name, untrusted-wrapped. NULL is an honest 'we hold no match', never 'there is nobody'.
countryNoWhere the company is, which can differ from the posting's client_location. Null when we hold no country for the company — not a claim that they have none.
upwork_idNoThe posting this buyer sits behind.
confidenceNoHow sure the match is. 'high' means the posting was matched to this company on evidence strong enough to name them without hedging. Below 'high' it is a best guess from the posting's own signals — a lead, not a fact, and say so if you relay it.
client_publicNoThe client's own public counters off the posting — see ClientPublic.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses multiple behavioral traits beyond annotations: confidence grades are best guesses, null means 'we do not know' rather than 'there is nobody', and the tool is restricted to postings from the current corpus. These limitations materially affect how an agent should interpret and relay results. The description does not contradict the readOnlyHint, openWorldHint false, or idempotentHint 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 front-loaded with the core purpose and then systematically covers usage, parameter meaning, confidence interpretation, null semantics, and feed scope. Each sentence adds distinct value; the structure makes the limitations easy to parse despite the length.

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 an output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return fields. It covers all needed invocation context: when to use it, how to interpret confidence, what null means, and which IDs are acceptable. This is complete for a read-only lookup tool.

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%, so the schema already fully documents upwork_id, including format constraints and the instruction that it is not a URL and lacks the leading '~'. The description adds only a brief restatement that upwork_id is the posting's id, which does not meaningfully extend the schema's guidance.

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 clear, specific statement: it identifies who is actually behind an anonymous posting. It goes beyond the vague title 'Who the client is' by explaining the de-anonymisation behavior, naming the company, and providing a confidence grade. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_job and get_buyer_quality.

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 explicitly says to use it before writing a proposal to know who you are addressing. It also clearly defines the feed-scope limitation and that out-of-scope IDs are refused. It does not name an alternative tool or contrast with siblings, but the usage context is unambiguous.

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

All Moxlade — Upwork buyer intelligence toolsInspect
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

A4.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool maps to a distinct resource or action: search, filter validation, saved-search management, buyer lookup, buyer quality, job scoring, market rates, and account/plan introspection. The get_* tools are cleanly separated by complements such as get_job vs get_job_score and get_buyer vs get_buyer_quality, so an agent should not struggle to pick the right one.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names consistently use snake_case verb_noun or verb_adjective_noun patterns, such as search_jobs, check_prefilter, delete_saved_search, and get_buyer_quality. There are no camelCase names, vague verb-only names, or mixed conventions.

Tool Count5/5

At 15 tools, the server sits exactly within the ideal range and each tool earns its place in the workflow. The set covers discovery, enrichment, saved-search lifecycle, and account introspection without obvious redundancy.

Completeness4/5

The core workflow is well covered: search, prefilter validation, job detail, scoring, buyer identity, payment quality, saved-search create/list/delete, and plan/activity visibility. The main gap is the lack of an update operation for an existing saved search, such as changing its filter or attaching a webhook later; this is a minor workaround rather than a blocking dead end.

Resources