Skip to main content
Glama

Tekmetric MCP Server and API by Cotlet

List customers in Tekmetric

tekmetric_list_customers
Read-onlyIdempotent

List customers in the user's own Tekmetric account from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent. Returns how to do it in Tekmetric step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself; then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's Tekmetric Cloud Browser. Tekmetric's official API: Yes, Tekmetric has a partner API at api.tekmetric.com, but access is by application and Tekmetric decides who gets it (checked 28 Oct 2026).

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": "tekmetric_list_customers"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world. The description adds important behavior: it returns instructions rather than performing the action, opens nothing, and requires browser tools to execute; it also notes API access is application-gated. No contradiction.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is reasonably front-loaded but includes tangential API-access detail and a checked date, and the opening 'List customers' is immediately qualified by 'Returns how to do it', which makes the structure less crisp.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter, read-only guide tool with no output schema, the description covers what it returns (step-by-step screens/buttons/fields) and how to proceed with browser tools. It could be clearer about the exact return shape, but it is largely complete.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; the description adds no parameter meaning because none exist.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names the resource and scope ('customers in the user's own Tekmetric account'), but the stated behavior ('Returns how to do it ... and opens nothing by itself') conflicts with the name/title 'List customers', so an agent may not immediately know whether the tool lists data or returns instructions.

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?

It tells the agent to use this tool to get step-by-step instructions and then perform the action with cotlet_browser_* tools, and notes it opens nothing itself. It does not compare against other Tekmetric listing tools, but the next-step guidance is explicit.

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.

Resources