Skip to main content
Glama

List Endpoints for a Platform

socialcrawl_list_endpoints
Read-onlyIdempotent

List endpoints with their full parameter contract — required + optional params, types, integer ranges, enum values, parameter couplings, CSV limits, pagination style, cache TTL, and per-endpoint pricing (including metered bands). Pass a platform for that platform's reference, or a search term to find an endpoint across all 65 platforms / 575 endpoints. Filter with method, maxCost, and hydrating (endpoints that can fill their own rows in one call via include=). No API key required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number (default 1). Output longer than one response is paged, not truncated — the footer says how many pages there are and repeats your filters.
detailNo'full' (default for a single platform) prints every parameter with its type, range, enum values, and couplings. 'compact' prints the summary table only — use it when searching broadly.
methodNoOnly show endpoints served with this HTTP method.
searchNoFree-text search over endpoint names, summaries, descriptions, archetypes, and tags (e.g. 'transcript', 'reviews', 'followers'). Works with or without `platform` — without one it searches all platforms.
maxCostNoOnly show endpoints that cost at most this many credits per call (metered endpoints are judged by their ceiling).
platformNoPlatform slug (e.g., 'tiktok', 'instagram', 'youtube'). Omit it and pass `search` to look for an endpoint across all platforms.
hydratingNoOnly show endpoints that can fill their own rows in the same call via an `include=` row join (e.g. a search page that can carry engagement counts). Use it to find the one call that answers a question instead of a page plus one lookup per row.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / hydrating
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Only show endpoints that can fill their own rows in the same call via an `include=` row join (e.g. a search page that can carry engagement counts). Use it to find the one call that answers a question instead of a page plus one lookup per row.",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: 'No API key required' (auth profile) and the shape of what a listing contains (pricing incl. metered bands, cache TTL, pagination style). It stops short of describing result ordering or size limits, so not a 5.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource and its payload, then the selection modes and filters. Dense but each clause carries information; the long enumeration of contract fields is the only mild bloat.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries return-value burden and does so reasonably: it tells the agent the listing includes parameter contracts, pricing bands, pagination style, and cache TTL. For a discovery tool with 7 optional params and full schema coverage, this is nearly sufficient; only the response envelope/format specifics are absent.

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 the schema already documents all seven parameters in detail, including hydrating's include= semantics. The description restates method/maxCost/hydrating and adds a small gloss on hydrating ('can fill their own rows in one call'), but contributes little meaning not already present in the schema. Baseline 3 is correct.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (endpoints) with scope detail: 'full parameter contract' across '65 platforms / 575 endpoints'. An agent can tell it is the endpoint-level reference tool. It does not, however, explicitly distinguish itself from nearby siblings like socialcrawl_list_platforms, socialcrawl_get_docs, or socialcrawl_discover, leaving the boundary to be inferred.

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?

Clearly states the two selection modes ('Pass a platform for that platform's reference, or a search term to find an endpoint across all platforms') and names the three filters (method, maxCost, hydrating). Missing explicit when-not-to-use guidance relative to siblings such as list_platforms or discover, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.