unsubscribeCancel a subscription by id. Ownership is enforced — you can only cancel your own subscriptions. The row is deactivated (not deleted) so its historical events stay available via recent_alerts.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Subscription id (uuid) returned by subscribe. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Adds valuable context beyond annotations: ownership is enforced, the row is deactivated rather than deleted, and historical events remain accessible via recent_alerts. This aligns with the idempotent and destructive hints while giving richer operational understanding.
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 action, and every sentence provides essential behavioral or contextual information. No wasted words.
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?
Given the single parameter, good annotation coverage, and absence of output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, its constraints, and the post-effect. It is self-sufficient for an agent to use correctly.
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?
The schema already fully documents the single parameter (id as a uuid returned by subscribe) with 100% coverage. The description adds no further parameter-specific semantics beyond 'by id', so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.
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 'Cancel a subscription by id' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like subscribe and list_subscriptions. The action is unambiguous.
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?
Provides clear context about ownership enforcement and the soft-delete behavior, and references recent_alerts for historical events. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, just implies the context.
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.
Some tools have distinct purposes (e.g., color tools, memory tools), but many data query tools (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, entity_profile) overlap significantly, making it hard for an agent to choose the right one without deep knowledge of their nuances.
Most tool names use snake_case with a verb_noun pattern (e.g., convert_color, identify_color, resolve_entity), but there is inconsistency in prefixes: some use 'ask_pipeworx', others 'pipeworx_', 'polymarket_', or 'scan_'. Overall, still readable and predictable.
33 tools is on the high side for a single server, especially one named 'colorapi' which misleadingly suggests a focus on color only. The tool count is borderline appropriate for the actual broad data integration scope, but the mismatch with the server name is problematic.
The tool set covers a wide range of data sources and operations (SEC, FDA, patents, news, Polymarket, memory, subscriptions), with few obvious gaps. Minor lacks: no direct tool for updating stored memories or handling non-US companies, but overall comprehensive.