Linked API

retrieve_ssi

Read-only

Allows you to retrieve your current SSI (Social Selling Index) (st.retrieveSSI action).

Linked API actions are queued into a cloud-browser workflow and may take several minutes. The server returns immediately after starting the workflow with {status: 'pending'|'running', pendingReason, workflowId, operationName, message}. To retrieve the final result, call get_workflow_result with the returned workflowId and operationName — it will long-poll until completion or the request budget elapses, then return either the final result or another in-progress snapshot. Do not retry the original tool while a workflow is still running; that creates duplicate queued work.

A pending workflow carries pendingReason: 'queued' means it is waiting its turn behind other work on the same account and will start within minutes. 'outsideWorkingHours' means the account has configured working hours and the workflow is parked until they reopen — possibly the next working day. In that case get_workflow_result returns immediately instead of polling, message states when the window opens, and you should report that to the user rather than looping.

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": "retrieve_ssi"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint; the description goes far beyond them by disclosing the asynchronous queued-workflow model, the immediate return shape ({status, pendingReason, workflowId, operationName, message}), and the meaning of pendingReason values 'queued' and 'outsideWorkingHours'. It also warns that retrying creates duplicate queued work, which is exactly the kind of non-obvious behavioral hazard an agent needs.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by the async pattern and then the pendingReason semantics in a logical order. Three paragraphs is on the long side and the status-object field list is repeated in spirit by the pendingReason paragraph, but each paragraph carries distinct operational 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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining returns and does so: it names the immediate pending/running snapshot fields and states what get_workflow_result eventually yields. For a parameterless, asynchronous tool, an agent has everything needed to call it, handle pending states, and avoid duplicate work.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is no parameter meaning the description could add or omit. The description correctly implies the call is parameterless and instead explains how the returned workflowId and operationName feed the follow-up call.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'retrieve your current SSI (Social Selling Index)', plus the underlying action name st.retrieveSSI. It is clearly a read of one account-level metric. It does not differentiate itself from the similarly-scoped sibling retrieve_performance, which an agent could easily confuse it with, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Strong lifecycle guidance: call get_workflow_result with the returned workflowId and operationName, do not retry the original tool while a workflow is running, and report the working-hours window to the user instead of looping. What is missing is any guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as retrieve_performance, so the when-to-use-vs-siblings dimension is unaddressed.

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

All Linked API tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.