toolradar

changes_since

Read-onlyIdempotent

Software pricing changes Toolradar confirmed on vendor pages since a date, newest first. A vendor's own site does not give you this. The record starts in October 2026: no entry for a tool means no change recorded, not proof of a stable price.

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": {
      "since": "<since>"
    },
    "name": "changes_since"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Default 20, max 50
`since`	Yes	ISO date, e.g. 2026-10-01
`context`	No	Optional. In a few words, what the user is trying to do. No names, emails or other personal data.
`category`	No	Category slug (optional)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	No
`count`	No
`since`	No
`changes`	No
`citation`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 30, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / context

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional. In a few words, what the user is trying to do. No names, emails or other personal data.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

AddedOct 30, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety and idempotency, and the description adds useful behavioral context: provenance from vendor pages, newest-first ordering, and the critical caveat that the record starts in October 2026 and absence of an entry is not proof of no change. It does not discuss pagination or rate limits, but the added caveats are materially useful.

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 three sentences and front-loads the core purpose. Each sentence contributes useful information, though the second sentence is partly positioning rather than operational guidance.

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?

Given the output schema, rich annotations, and 100% schema description coverage, the description is largely complete for correct invocation. It covers provenance, ordering, and the main interpretive caveat, with only minor gaps around explicit sibling alternatives and pagination.

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 all four parameters are already documented structurally. The description adds only the high-level notion of a date range and result ordering; it does not add syntax or meaning beyond what the schema provides for limit, category, or context.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it returns software pricing changes confirmed on vendor pages since a date. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as verify_price or get_pricing.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the description and its caveats, especially the note that a vendor's own site does not provide this and that missing entries are not proof of a stable price. However, it does not state when to choose this tool over alternatives like verify_price or get_pricing.

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

All toolradar 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.