nuvemshop_list_accounts
Read-onlyIdempotent
Lista lojas Nuvemshop vinculadas a este install — store_id, label e apelido.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| account | No |
Nuvemshop
TDQS
B3.1/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds value by specifying the output fields (store_id, label, apelido), which goes beyond the annotations. However, it does not describe the effect of the 'account' parameter or any other behaviors.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness3/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence with the key information front-loaded, but it omits any explanation of the parameter. Conciseness is good, but completeness suffers.
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?
There is no output schema, so the description should fully explain the return value. It lists three fields but may be incomplete. The behavior of the optional parameter is ignored. Given the tool's simplicity, the description is partially adequate but lacks critical details.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema has one optional parameter 'account' with no description and no enum or constraints. The tool description does not mention this parameter at all, leaving the agent without knowledge of its purpose or expected values. With 0% schema coverage and no compensatory description, this is a critical gap.
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?
The description clearly states the verb 'Lista' (lists) and the resource 'lojas Nuvemshop vinculadas a este install' (Nuvemshop stores linked to this install), specifying the returned fields. It distinguishes from sibling tools like nuvemshop_orders_list. However, the optional 'account' parameter is not explained, slightly reducing clarity.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies the tool is for listing accounts tied to the current installation, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives. No when-not-to-use or prerequisites are mentioned.
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.
TDQS
C2.6/5.0
Disambiguation2/5
Many tools have overlapping functionality, especially the get/list pairs for customers, orders, and products which have identical descriptions except for the default action. The multiple order write tools (cancel, close, fulfill, etc.) also share the same underlying description, making it difficult for an agent to select the correct one.
Naming Consistency2/5
Tool names mix patterns: some use simple <resource> (nuvemshop_categories), others use <resource>_<action> (nuvemshop_customers_get), and others use <resource>_write_<action> (nuvemshop_orders_write_cancel). The get/list split for customers, orders, and products is inconsistent with the categories tool which lacks such a split.
Tool Count2/5
With 24 tools, the server has an excessive number for its scope. Many tools are redundant (e.g., separate get and list tools for each resource, and individual write tools for order status transitions). Consolidating these would reduce the count and improve usability.
Completeness3/5
The server covers the main e-commerce resources (categories, coupons, customers, orders, products) with read and write operations. However, there are gaps: no ability to create or delete customers, delete products, or delete coupons. The set is workable but not fully comprehensive.