Skip to main content
Glama

Recall Kitchen

by io.github.adamdecaf

signup

Create a Recall Kitchen account and API key from an email. No API key or x402 payment required. The key is returned once. Unverified accounts have lower rate limits (60 tool calls/hour, 400/day, one key) and can add a few watch patterns. Sign in at https://app.recallkitchen.com with the same email to verify, raise limits, and add inventory. Does not re-issue a key if the email already has an account.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNooptional display name
emailYesemail address for the new account

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailYes
key_idYes
limitsYes
api_keyYes
messageYes
user_idYes
email_verifiedYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The annotations only flag that this is not read-only, not idempotent, and not destructive; the description adds rich behavior: key issued once, unverified rate limits, verification path, and no re-issue for existing accounts. No contradiction with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Every sentence carries a distinct, necessary fact: creation action, no preconditions, one-time key, rate limits/verification, and existing-account caveat. Front-loaded with the verb and resource, then caveats in decreasing importance.

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?

For an account-creation tool, the description covers prerequisites, side effects, limits, verification, and account-existence behavior. An output schema exists, so the absence of return-value detail in the description is acceptable.

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% and both parameters are already explained in the schema. The description adds context that email is used to create the account and key, but it does not need to add parameter-level syntax because the schema covers it.

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?

States a specific action—create a Recall Kitchen account and API key from an email—and adds differentiation by noting no API key/x402 payment is needed and that existing accounts do not get a re-issued key. This makes it easy to tell apart from create_api_key and other siblings.

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 implies initial-signup usage: it is for users without an API key, and it explicitly warns that an email already tied to an account will not get a new key. It does not name create_api_key as the alternative for existing accounts, so it stops short of fully explicit alternatives.

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

All Recall Kitchen 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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clear, distinct resource-action boundaries (inventory vs. watch patterns vs. notifications vs. search). The search tools overlap somewhat—especially search_product_recalls_by_upc, search_product_recalls_from_image, and search_recalls_by_identifier—but their input types and intent are described well enough to avoid major confusion.

Naming Consistency4/5

The overwhelming majority follow a predictable verb_noun snake_case pattern (add_inventory_product, list_watch_patterns, revoke_api_key). Minor deviations like signup, list_inventory, and search_recalls_by_identifier (instead of search_product_recalls_by_identifier) keep it from being perfectly consistent.

Tool Count4/5

With 19 tools, the server is slightly on the heavier side, but the count is justified by covering several distinct areas: account/key management, inventory, watch patterns, recall search, and notifications. Each tool appears to serve a real purpose, though a few search variants could arguably be consolidated.

Completeness4/5

The set covers the core lifecycle well: signup, key management, inventory and watch pattern add/list/remove, multiple recall search paths, recall detail lookup, and notification read state. Minor gaps exist, such as no update operation for inventory items or watch patterns and no bulk notification actions, but agents can work around these.

Resources