Skip to main content
Glama

Digital Manager Guru

by io.github.mcp-dir

guru_subscriptions_write_set_increment_discount

Mutações em assinaturas Guru. Ações: cancel (id, +data opcional); cancel_at_cycle_end (id); add_coupon (id + data); remove_coupon (id); set_current_offer (id + data); set_next_offer (id + data); set_cycle_end_date (id + data); set_trial_end_date (id + data); set_installment (id + data); change_plan (id + data); simulate_plan (id + data); set_payment_types (id + data); set_increment_discount (id + data); remove_increment_discount (id).

[Flattened action: set_increment_discount]

Bulk support: accepts ids for batched execution.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
idsNo
dataNo
accountNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false; the description adds only 'Mutações' and bulk support. It does not disclose whether setting an increment discount overwrites an existing one, what happens with ids vs id, or any side effects or response behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description begins with a broad mutation phrase but then lists 13 unrelated actions, making it cluttered for a tool that is flattened to one action. The relevant detail is buried in the bracketed note and bulk-support sentence; it is compact but not well structured for quick selection.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With 4 parameters, a nested `data` object, no output schema, and no action-specific explanation, the description is under-specified. It lacks a definition of increment discount, data field semantics, account/ids usage, and expected results or errors, so an agent cannot reliably construct a correct call.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It states 'set_increment_discount (id + data)' and 'Bulk support: accepts ids', covering id, data, and ids at a high level. It does not explain the `account` parameter, the required/optional structure of `data`, or how the bulk `ids` array behaves relative to `id`.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description says 'Mutações em assinaturas Guru' and lists many actions, then narrows to '[Flattened action: set_increment_discount]', which helps identify the specific operation. However, it never explains what setting an increment discount actually does or how it differs from siblings like remove_increment_discount; the long action list adds ambiguity.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus related subscription write tools such as remove_increment_discount, change_plan, or set_current_offer. The 'Flattened action' note implies this tool is for set_increment_discount, but no alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusions are stated.

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

All Digital Manager Guru 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

C2.3/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

The tool names themselves are distinct (e.g., guru_subscriptions_get vs guru_subscriptions_activities), but the descriptions for each resource are identical except for a '[Flattened action: X]' tag, listing all possible actions. This repetition can confuse agents into selecting the wrong tool, especially since many tools share the same description body. The naming is clear but the descriptive overlap undermines disambiguation.

Naming Consistency4/5

The majority of tools follow a consistent pattern: guru_<resource>_<action> for reads and guru_<resource>_write_<action> for writes. However, there are outliers like 'authenticate', 'connect', 'marketplace', 'report_bug', etc., which break the pattern. Within the Guru API itself, the naming is highly predictable, but the occasional non-Guru tool reduces overall consistency.

Tool Count1/5

With 101 tools, the server is grossly over-scoped. The API has been fragmented into a separate tool for every action across many resources (e.g., subscriptions alone have 15+ tools). This is far beyond the typical MCP server size and makes the tool list overwhelming and impractical for agents to navigate. The extreme granularity offers no benefit over a smaller, well-organized set.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide range of operations: CRUD for contacts, subscriptions, transactions, products, coupons, webhooks, and more, including write actions like refunds, chargebacks, and subscription modifications. The domain appears well-covered, though some resources lack create operations (e.g., no create subscription) and there are a few gaps like missing explicit update for transactions. Overall, the coverage is thorough for the stated API surface.

Resources