Skip to main content
Glama

get_inventory

Gets all items in inventory that belong to the users company. Inventory items have a name, id, value (cost), stock, and other parameters. Quantities are decimals. When an item has a unit (e.g. "kg", "lb", "ml") every quantity on it (inventoryCount, onOrderCount, damagedCount, toShipCount) is measured in that unit; when unit is null the item is counted in discrete pieces.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_inventory"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does add real behavioral context: company-level scoping and the unit semantics that govern how inventoryCount, onOrderCount, damagedCount and toShipCount should be interpreted. It still omits result size, pagination, ordering, and whether deleted items appear, which are the operational traits an agent needs.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by the returned-field summary and the unit rule. Every sentence earns its place; only mild redundancy in 'and other parameters', which adds no information.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must explain what comes back, and it does so usefully: field list, decimal quantities, and the unit-vs-discrete-pieces rule. The remaining gap is scope detail (deleted items, pagination, ordering) that an agent querying a whole-company listing would want.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description wisely redirects its space to return-value semantics rather than parameter detail.

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 and resource ('Gets all items in inventory') plus the scoping rule (items belonging to the user's company). It does not distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as find_item_by_barcode or list_deleted_inventory_items, which is what keeps it short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer find_item_by_barcode, list_deleted_inventory_items, or get_reorder_suggestions. There is no statement about whether deleted items are included or whether results are paginated, so the agent must guess.

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.

Resources