Reprice or unlist something the user already sells. Use when they want to raise, lower or change a price, make a tool free, pause selling it, or take it off the market. Requires the api_key from register_server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| api_key | No | Your seller key. | |
| is_active | No | Set false to stop selling this tool. | |
| price_usd | No | New price per call in USD. Minimum 0.01. | |
| tool_name | Yes | Exact name of the tool to update. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds the api_key requirement and clarifies the unlist action, but it introduces an inconsistency: it says 'make a tool free' while the schema states price_usd minimum is 0.01, so the claimed behavior cannot be achieved as described. This lowers transparency.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, followed by clear use cases and a requirement. Every sentence earns its place with no fluff or repetition of schema details.
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?
The tool is a simple mutation with good annotations and high schema coverage. The description covers the main use cases and prerequisite but leaves a behavioral gap around the 'make free' vs. minimum price contradiction, and does not mention what happens on unlist (e.g., whether is_active=false is required). It is adequate but not fully complete.
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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about api_key origin ('from register_server') but does not add meaningful semantics for other parameters beyond the schema. In fact, it conflicts with price_usd's minimum via the 'make a tool free' phrase.
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 tool's purpose with specific verbs and resource: 'Reprice or unlist something the user already sells.' It enumerates concrete use cases (raise/lower price, make free, pause selling, take off market) which fully distinguishes it from sibling read-only tools.
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 explicitly states when to use the tool ('Use when they want to raise, lower or change a price...') and mentions a prerequisite (requires api_key from register_server). It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear given the sibling list, so it misses the top level only by not saying 'instead of X'.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct action: earnings retrieval, listing review, marketplace browsing, server registration, price updates, and ownership verification. No two tools have overlapping purposes, making misselection unlikely.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (get_earnings, list_registered_servers, set_tool_price). The style is uniform and predictable.
At 6 tools, the set is well-scoped for a monetization gateway covering both seller and buyer workflows. Each tool serves a necessary function without bloat or excessive granularity.
Core seller workflows are covered: register, price, view listing, view earnings, verify. Buyer browsing is also covered. Minor gaps exist, such as no tool to unregister a server or update payout destination, but these are workarounds and not fatal.