Skip to main content
Glama

Check listing ownership

check_listing_ownership

Look for the listing's ownership_code on the product: a meta tag on the home page, /.well-known/shipdesk-verify.txt, a DNS TXT record, or the App Store / Google Play listing. Put the code there (and deploy it) first; it can be removed once verified.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesthe listing id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations and no output schema, the description does useful work by disclosing the external setup requirement and the multiple verification channels. However, it does not state permissions, rate limits, idempotency, failure modes, or what the check returns, leaving significant behavioral gaps for a tool with no structured guidance.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the lookup behavior and followed by the critical prerequisite. No wording is wasted.

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 simple one-parameter tool, the description covers the essential workflow: prepare the code externally, deploy it, then call the check. It still omits return/failure semantics, which matters more because there is no output schema, but the core invocation context is present.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the single id parameter is already documented as the listing id. The description references the listing but adds no extra format, constraints, or meaning beyond the schema.

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 verification action: looking for the listing's ownership_code on the product. It also enumerates the exact locations checked (meta tag, well-known file, DNS TXT, app store listing), so the agent can distinguish this from sibling listing-management 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?

It clearly gives the prerequisite for use: place the ownership code and deploy it first, then verify. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the context is clear enough for this focused verification tool.

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