STRIDE Sneaker Shop
Server Details
Pre-owned sneaker shop catalog: search in-stock shoes by keyword/brand/price, get buy links.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 3.8/5 across 3 of 3 tools scored.
Each tool serves a distinct purpose: get_product for specific details, search_products for browsing, and get_store_info for store-level information. No overlap in functionality.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in lowercase snake_case (get_product, get_store_info, search_products), making them predictable and readable.
Three tools is well-scoped for a sneaker shop server: search, detail retrieval, and store info. It covers the essential customer-facing operations without being overly minimal or excessive.
The set covers browsing and store information, but lacks a list_all_products tool (though search might suffice). Minor gap, as core workflows are supported via buy links and WhatsApp ordering.
Available Tools
3 toolsget_productGet product detailsAInspect
Get full details of one product by its id or SKU: description, per-size stock, all images, buy links.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Product id (from a product URL or search result) or SKU |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions the return content but does not disclose safety (read-only assumption), idempotency, error behavior, or any side effects. Bare minimum for a read operation.
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?
One concise sentence that front-loads the action and specifies the parameter. No unnecessary words; every part contributes to purpose.
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?
For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly complete: it states the input (id or SKU) and the output details. Lacks mention of error handling (e.g., product not found).
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 coverage is 100% with a clear description for 'id' parameter. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema for the parameter itself; it only lists return fields.
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?
Description uses specific verb 'Get' and resource 'full details of one product', listing exactly what is included (description, per-size stock, images, buy links). Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools get_store_info and search_products by focusing on single product details.
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?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it's for obtaining comprehensive product info, but lacks explicit when/when-not conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_store_infoGet store infoAInspect
Store overview: payment methods, WhatsApp ordering link, current Treasure Hunt promo and useful links.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the content of the response but does not explicitly state it is read-only, non-destructive, or any behavioral traits like auth needs or rate limits.
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?
One sentence, front-loaded with key information, no wasted words. Ideal conciseness.
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?
For a tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the tool's purpose and output, making it complete for an agent.
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?
No parameters exist, so baseline is 4. The description adds value by detailing what the tool returns, going beyond the empty schema.
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 clearly states the tool provides a store overview with specific elements: payment methods, WhatsApp ordering link, current Treasure Hunt promo, and useful links. It distinguishes itself from siblings get_product and search_products by focusing on store-level info rather than products.
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?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description implies it is for general store info, but does not mention when not to use it or provide context for selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_productsSearch sneakers in stockAInspect
Search the live catalog of in-stock pre-owned/refurbished sneakers by keywords, brand and/or max price. Returns product cards with name, price, sizes in stock, image and buy link.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| brand | No | Filter by brand name, e.g. 'Nike' | |
| limit | No | Max results, default 10 | |
| query | No | Keywords matched against product name, brand, category and SKU, e.g. 'nike air max' | |
| max_price_usd | No | Only return products at or below this USD price |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions that the search is against a live catalog of in-stock items and returns specific fields (name, price, sizes, image, buy link). However, it does not disclose edge cases, authentication needs, rate limits, or behavior when no results are found.
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?
Two sentences no fluff. First sentence covers purpose and parameters, second covers output. Front-loaded with action and scope.
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?
For a tool with 4 optional params, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately covers input and output shape. It could mention sorting or pagination, but is generally complete.
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?
All 4 parameters have descriptions in the schema, so baseline is 3. The description adds context that the search is for 'pre-owned/refurbished sneakers' and that it returns product cards with specific fields, which adds value beyond the schema.
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 clearly states the tool searches the live catalog of in-stock pre-owned/refurbished sneakers by keywords, brand, and/or max price. It distinguishes itself from siblings: get_product (single product details) and get_store_info (store info).
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 tells what the tool does but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or when not to use it. It implies use for searching, but lacks explicit guidance or exclusion criteria.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
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
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!