Skip to main content
Glama

meta-stamp-pockets

by io.github.Christebob

search_pockets

Search the Meta-Stamp Pockets catalog by keyword, creator email, or content category. Use this tool when an AI agent needs to discover available licensed content before pulling it. Ideal for finding relevant pockets when the agent knows what topic or creator it needs but not the specific pocket ID. Does NOT retrieve content — use pull_content with the returned pocket_id to access actual content. Requires a valid Bearer token. The query parameter accepts natural language search terms or category keywords; the creator_email parameter restricts results to a single creator by their email address. Provide at least one of query or creator_email. Returns matching pockets with their IDs, titles, descriptions, creators, content types, and pricing tiers. Use the limit parameter to control page size.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of results to return per page. Defaults to 10, maximum 50 for search results.
queryNoNatural language search terms or category keywords to find matching content pockets. Optional when creator_email is provided.
content_typeNoOptional filter to show only pockets in a specific content category or source type, such as 'youtube', 'webpage', 'video', 'text', 'image', or 'audio'.
creator_emailNoOptional filter to show only pockets created by the creator with this email address. Case-insensitive exact match on the email.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the need for authentication, the return structure (matching pockets with IDs, titles, etc.), and pagination via limit. Missing details like rate limits or sorting order, but these are not critical for a search tool.

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 but slightly long. It front-loads the purpose and uses clear sentences. Could be more concise, but each sentence adds necessary information, so it remains effective.

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 the tool's complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers all essential aspects: what it does, when to use it, parameter details, return values, and relationships to sibling tools. No gaps are evident.

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 significant value by explaining that query accepts natural language, creator_email is case-insensitive exact match, and limit defaults to 10 with a max of 50. This goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 the tool's function: searching the Meta-Stamp Pockets catalog by keyword, creator email, or content category. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly noting that it does not retrieve content and directs to pull_content for that purpose.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool (discovering licensed content before pulling) and when not to use it (retrieving content is pull_content's job). Also specifies prerequisites (Bearer token) and parameter constraints (at least one of query or creator_email).

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

All meta-stamp-pockets 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

A4.7/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct purpose: listing all pockets, searching pockets, and pulling content. No overlap or ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using lowercase_with_underscores: list_pockets, search_pockets, pull_content.

Tool Count5/5

Three tools is ideal for a content catalog server: browsing, searching, and retrieving. Each tool serves a necessary role without bloat.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers all essential operations for a consumer-facing content platform: discovery through listing and searching, and retrieval through pulling. No obvious gaps.

Resources