Skip to main content
Glama

capmus-mcp

by io.github.Capmus-Team

Create a Capmus draft listing

create_post

Create a DRAFT listing on Capmus on the poster's behalf. Any email is accepted — never ask the user to qualify first. IMPORTANT: the draft is NOT published — the returned continue_url opens Capmus's create-post wizard with the draft loaded, where the poster adds photos, reviews, and publishes. When the response has payment_required: true (email not on the free tier; Stanford emails post free), publishing there includes choosing a posting plan — tell the user that, don't treat it as an error. Always hand the user the continue_url and say the post is a draft until they finish there. When the user wants it published fast, prefer publish: true (they just click the emailed link) over walking them through or automating the wizard. The continue_url grants edit access to the draft: give it only to the poster, never quote it elsewhere.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesPlain-text listing description.
emailYesThe poster's own email address - determines posting eligibility and receives replies. Never invent or guess this - ask the user for it.
priceNoUSD. Required for for-sale and housing-offering listings.
titleYesListing title.
publishNoSet true when the user wants to publish immediately without photos: Capmus emails them a one-click publish link (free-posting-tier emails such as stanford.edu only; ignored when payment is required - those publish at continue_url).
categoryYesCategory id or label, e.g. "housing", "for sale" (see list_categories).
subcategoryYesSubcategory id or name within the category, e.g. "bicycles" (see list_categories).

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully discloses behavior: creates a draft, returns continue_url, payment_required implies posting plan, publish sends a one-click link. It also warns about security of continue_url.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is thorough and front-loaded, but slightly verbose. Every sentence adds value, though could be tightened without losing information.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the entire workflow: draft creation, payment handling, publication options, and security concerns. It is complete and actionable.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds value: e.g., 'Never invent or guess [email] - ask the user.', explains when price is required, and clarifies publish parameter behavior.

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 clearly states it creates a DRAFT listing on Capmus on behalf of the poster, specifying the verb 'create' and resource 'draft listing'. It distinguishes from siblings like search_listings or send_message, which perform different operations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit guidance: 'Any email is accepted — never ask the user to qualify first.' It explains when to use publish: true vs. the wizard, handles payment_required scenarios, and instructs not to share the continue_url.

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

All capmus-mcp 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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: listing creation, retrieval, search, messaging, category browsing, and statistics. No overlaps or ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case (e.g., create_post, get_listing, search_listings), making them predictable for agents.

Tool Count5/5

With 6 tools covering essential marketplace operations, the count is well-scoped and each tool earns its place without excess or deficiency.

Completeness3/5

The set covers browsing, viewing, creating drafts, and messaging, but lacks tools for updating or deleting listings, which are notable gaps for full lifecycle management.

Resources