subscription_manageGet a Stripe management URL (portal, upgrade, or cancel). Also covers billing portal — returns the URL for the user to open.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tier | No | Which plan to subscribe to (required for "subscribe" action). | |
| action | Yes | "subscribe" to start a subscription, "manage" to view/cancel existing subscription. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate non-read-only and non-idempotent behavior, and the description adds that the tool returns a URL for the user to open. However, it does not disclose that 'subscribe' may initiate a checkout flow or that opening the URL can lead to subscription changes. This understates the behavioral impact, especially since readOnlyHint is false.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is short and front-loaded with the main outcome. There is minor redundancy between 'portal' and 'billing portal', but overall the text is scannable and every sentence contributes meaning.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
There is no output schema, so describing the return value as a URL is helpful. However, the description fails to cover the 'subscribe' action and the corresponding checkout URL, making it incomplete for a tool whose action enum includes both subscribe and manage. An agent handling a 'start a subscription' request would be underinformed.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with clear descriptions and enums for both 'action' and 'tier'. The description adds little beyond the schema, except indirectly implying 'upgrade' behavior. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the parameter-documentation load.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states a specific verb and resource: get a Stripe management URL for portal, upgrade, or cancel. It also mentions the billing portal and that it returns a URL for the user to open. However, it omits the 'subscribe' action that the schema explicitly supports, so the full purpose is understated and it does not distinguish itself from sibling billing tools.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies use for subscription management and billing-portal requests, but it does not provide explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives such as invoice_list, top_up_credits, or credits_balance. It also gives no guidance about when to use 'subscribe' versus 'manage' beyond what the schema already states.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Tools are grouped by clear resource prefixes (account_, brain_, connector_, credential_, file_, job_, key_), and most actions have distinct purposes. A few boundaries overlap—brain_admin's lint action duplicates brain_lint, and account_preferences/setup/switch could momentarily confuse—but the descriptions resolve most ambiguity.
The dominant pattern is resource_verb for actions (file_read, job_cancel, key_create) and resource_noun for state views (credits_balance, brain_settings, account_preferences), which is readable. However, exceptions like discover, use_tool, top_up_credits, and feedback_request_tool break the pattern, and the set is not consistently verb_noun.
47 tools is well beyond the comfortable range; even though prefixes organize them, the agent faces a large selection surface with many narrowly scoped tools. A more consolidated set with action-based subcommands would be easier to navigate.
Core workflows are covered end-to-end: account setup and billing, connector and credential management, file CRUD, job polling, key lifecycle, brain knowledge management, and catalogue discovery/execution. Gaps are minor—outfit/persona/product/scene are list-only, connectors lack an update operation, and there is no explicit single-page brain get—but agents can generally work around them.