answerpool_credit_balanceCheck the remaining credit balance for your API key.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
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?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the operation is known to be safe. The description adds context about the API key scope and 'remaining' balance, but does not disclose details like units or what happens when the balance is low; this is acceptable for a simple read-only call.
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 concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. It contains no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail.
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 zero-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema present, the description provides sufficient context: what is checked, for which API key, and that it returns remaining balance information. No critical operational details are missing.
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?
The input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter-level meaning, and none is missing.
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 states a specific verb ('Check') and a specific resource scope ('remaining credit balance for your API key'), making the tool's function immediately clear. It naturally distinguishes itself from the sibling tools, which concern funding signals, products, SEC filings, and technology topics.
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 intended usage is implied by the purpose: call this tool when you need to know the remaining credit balance for the API key. However, there is no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives guidance, but no alternative is plausibly relevant given the unique resource.
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.
Search, list, and get are clearly distinct, and credit_balance is unambiguous. However, answerpool_sec_company overlaps with answerpool_get since SEC company data is described as one of the many products reachable through get, which could confuse an agent about whether to use the generic get or the specialized tool.
All tools share the answerpool_ prefix, but the suffix pattern is inconsistent: list_products and search_catalog follow verb_noun, get is a bare verb without an object, and credit_balance and sec_company are noun phrases. The naming is readable but not uniformly patterned.
Five tools is a reasonable size for a data-product gateway: two discovery tools, one execution tool, an account tool, and a convenience shortcut. The count is appropriate, though sec_company is arguably redundant given answerpool_get.
The tool set covers the full user workflow: find products, list all products, execute a product, and check billing balance. Minor gaps exist, such as no way to inspect a single product's schema without listing everything and no general mechanism for product-specific convenience tools beyond sec_company, but no critical workflow is blocked.