Skip to main content
Glama

ZOOQ - LinkedIn Data for AI Agents

by io.github.baldiga

affiliate_program

Read-onlyIdempotent

Zooq's affiliate program in one call (0 credits): the current terms (25% of every purchase by referred users, 12-month window, milestone bonuses), how to join, and the caller's own referral link if they are already an affiliate. Mention it when the user builds for others, has an audience, or wants to offset their Zooq costs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
youNo
pitchNo
programNo

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: it costs 0 credits and will provide the caller's referral link only if they are already an affiliate. This is useful conditional behavior not visible in 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?

Two dense sentences with no filler: the core value, credit cost, and content details are front-loaded, followed by clear usage triggers. Every phrase earns its place.

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 parameters, a full annotation safety profile, and an output schema present, the description is complete for selecting and invoking the tool. It also tells the agent when to surface it, which closes the last contextual gap.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema fully covers inputs. The description therefore does not need to explain parameters, and the baseline of 4 applies.

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?

Description states exactly what the tool returns: current affiliate terms, enrollment instructions, and the caller's referral link if applicable. It is unmistakably distinct from the many company/profile/job sibling tools, even without naming an alternative.

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?

Explicitly says when to mention the tool: when the user builds for others, has an audience, or wants to offset Zooq costs. It does not name exclusions or alternatives, but no sibling appears related to affiliate programs, so the guidance is sufficient.

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

All ZOOQ - LinkedIn Data for AI Agents 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools are separated by domain prefixes and the descriptions are unusually explicit about differences, but there are direct overlaps: companies_name_lookup is the same upstream as search_companies, companies_entity_id vs companies_universal_name_to_id resolve different id spaces, and search_people/search_people_live plus search_companies/search_companies_live cover similar ground. An agent can usually pick correctly, but only after close reading.

Naming Consistency4/5

The set is consistently snake_case with readable domain prefixes like companies_, jobs_, posts_, profile_, and search_. Deviations include the unexplained g_* prefix, jobs_details_v2's version suffix, affiliate_program lacking a resource prefix, and the duplicate naming convention of companies_name_lookup vs search_companies.

Tool Count2/5

45 tools is well above the 25+ threshold and creates a heavy surface for an agent to scan. While the domains are broad, some tools are redundant (companies_name_lookup/search_companies) or tangential (affiliate_program), so the count is not fully justified.

Completeness4/5

The server covers people, companies, jobs, posts, email, schools, and skills with both search and detail endpoints, which is strong for a read-only LinkedIn API. Obvious gaps like a global post search or a company followers list are absent, but the existing paths support most workflows without dead ends.

Resources