Skip to main content
Glama

anyapi

by io.github.getanyapi-com

Browse APIs

list_apis
Read-only

Browse available AnyAPI APIs as lightweight summaries (id, name, category, USD pricing) - no descriptions or schemas, so it stays cheap even across the whole catalog. Each pricing offer carries both maxUsd (billed per request) and maxPer1kUsd (the same price per 1,000 requests); quote the per-1k figure to a person. Optionally filter by category. Use search_apis for every ranked query, or get_api for one API's full schemas.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contextYesExplain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."
categoryNooptional category slug to filter by

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
scrapersYesmatching APIs (lightweight summaries: no description or schemas)

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses meaningful behavior: the output is intentionally lightweight and cheap, excludes descriptions/schemas, and each pricing offer includes maxUsd and maxPer1kUsd with guidance to quote the per-1k figure. This adds real context for an agent deciding whether this tool fits the task.

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?

The description is compact, front-loaded with the core purpose, and each sentence carries distinct value: output content, cost/behavior, pricing-field semantics, and sibling routing. There is no filler or repetition.

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?

For a read-only listing tool with a rich output schema and explicit sibling guidance, the description covers the essential decision factors: scope, filtering, cost behavior, field semantics, and when to use alternatives. Nothing needed for correct invocation or selection is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage for both parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only that category is an optional filter, which is helpful but not a major semantic extension beyond the schema's own description.

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?

The description uses a specific verb and resource: 'Browse available AnyAPI APIs as lightweight summaries', and clearly scopes the result set to id, name, category, and USD pricing. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly saying it lacks descriptions/schemas, which separates it from get_api and search_apis.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description gives explicit routing guidance: 'Use search_apis for every ranked query, or get_api for one API's full schemas.' It also notes the optional category filter, so an agent knows when list_apis is the lightweight browsing choice and when an alternative is better.

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

All anyapi 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

A4.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Every tool has a clearly distinct purpose: browsing, searching, retrieving full schemas, quoting, executing, reading cached results, and checking balance. No two tools overlap.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case (e.g., list_apis, get_balance, run_api), making the set predictable and easy to navigate.

Tool Count5/5

With 7 tools, the set is well-scoped for the domain of an API marketplace. Each tool handles a distinct step in the workflow without unnecessary bloat or missing essentials.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle of discovering, quoting, executing, and retrieving results from APIs. Minor gaps include no tool for managing API keys or viewing past runs, but these are not critical for core functionality.

Resources