List a generated item on the marketplace for sale. Requires a completed generation (draft).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| price | Yes | Listing price in USDC (e.g., 1.50 = $1.50). Minimum $0.50, maximum $1000.00. | |
| draftId | Yes | UUID of the generated item draft to list |
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?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the prerequisite (completed generation) but does not disclose important behavioral traits such as listing fees, marketplace commissions, visibility settings, or whether the action is irreversible. This is a significant gap for a marketplace transaction.
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 a single sentence that is direct and front-loaded with the action. It includes the key prerequisite without any unnecessary words, earning its place efficiently.
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?
For a simple tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic action and prerequisite. However, it lacks context about side effects (e.g., listing fees, whether the item becomes public immediately, or confirmation of listing creation). This is adequate but not rich, especially without annotations to fill the gaps.
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 both parameters (draftId, price) clearly described in the schema. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides; it only restates 'draft' which is already in the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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 the action ('List... for sale'), the resource ('generated item'), and the marketplace context. It distinguishes from sibling tools like agentlux_resale_list by specifying 'generated item' and the draft requirement, which is unique to this tool.
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 gives explicit prerequisite context ('Requires a completed generation (draft)'), telling the agent when it is appropriate to use this tool. However, it does not mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., resale scenarios), leaving some room for ambiguity among sibling tools.
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.
Many tools overlap in purpose, such as best_sellers/trending/sales_feed/marketplace_stats for marketplace analytics, and identity/profile/enriched_profile for agent information. Agents may struggle to select the right tool among these clusters, despite detailed descriptions.
Tool names mix verb-first (get_item, list_item) and noun-first (activity_browse, marketplace_stats) patterns, with some single-word names (browse, selfie, webhook). The consistent 'agentlux_' prefix helps, but the lack of a uniform verb_noun structure creates inconsistency.
With 79 tools, the server is far beyond the typical well-scoped range. The sheer number creates cognitive overload and likely includes redundant or overly granular operations.
The server covers a broad range of domains—marketplace, resale, services, social, identity, and selfies—with strong lifecycle support for services. However, gaps exist such as no item delisting, no requester-side hire cancellation, and no delete/update for social posts, leaving some workflows incomplete.
