Skip to main content
Glama

List one-time number services

sms_activation_list_services
Read-only

One-time SMS numbers (a number that receives a single verification code and expires in ~20 minutes). List available services with their cheapest country and price. Flow: sms_activation_list_services -> sms_activation_list_countries -> sms_activation_buy_number -> poll sms_activation_get_code until done=true.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "sms_activation_list_services"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare this as read-only and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: one-time numbers receive a single verification code and expire in about 20 minutes, and results include the cheapest country and price.

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 and compact: it defines the service type, says what is listed, and gives the end-to-end flow in two sentences plus a flow line. Every element is useful and there is no repetition.

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?

For a no-parameter, read-only list tool with an output schema and annotations, the description covers the service type, output content, and workflow context. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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?

This tool has zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, so there is no parameter semantics burden. The description correctly does not invent parameter details.

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: 'List available services' for 'One-time SMS numbers', and it adds scope by defining one-time numbers as receiving a single verification code and expiring in ~20 minutes. This also distinguishes it from the rental-list sibling tools.

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 flow line explicitly positions this as the first step in a sequence: list services, then countries, then buy, then poll for the code. It does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or when to choose the rental alternatives, so it falls short of full alternatives guidance.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.