list_subscriptionsList the caller's active subscriptions. Returns id, type, params, created_at, last_fired_at, fire_count for each. Use this to review what you're monitoring before adding more or to find an id to cancel.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| include_inactive | No | Include cancelled subscriptions in the response (default false). |
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?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds value by specifying that only 'active' subscriptions are returned by default and that the response includes specific fields, which informs the agent about expected output.
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?
The description is two sentences, no redundant words. It front-loads the core function and immediately lists returned fields, then provides usage guidance. Every sentence serves a purpose.
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 simple with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description covers the return structure, default behavior, and usage context. It might lack mentions of pagination or rate limits, but these are not critical for this tool's completeness.
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 coverage is 100%, and the input schema already documents the include_inactive parameter well. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 lists the caller's active subscriptions and specifies the returned fields (id, type, params, etc.). It also distinguishes from siblings like subscribe and unsubscribe by focusing on listing.
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 provides explicit usage contexts: reviewing subscriptions before adding more, and finding an ID to cancel. It does not cover when not to use, but the guidance is clear and actionable.
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.
Several tools have overlapping purposes: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta (currently identical), ask_pipeworx_grounded, and deep_research all route to the same 5,529 tools; polymarket_arbitrage and polymarket_edges both find tradeable opportunities; discover_tools and suggest_questions both serve discovery. The beta tool being an exact duplicate makes misselection highly likely.
Most action tools follow verb_noun (ask_pipeworx, compare_entities, discover_tools, list_groups, resolve_entity, search_datasets, suggest_questions, validate_claim), but there is significant mixing with noun_noun (dataset_details, entity_profile, organization_details, pipeworx_feedback, polymarket_arbitrage) and adjective_noun (deep_research, recent_alerts). The Polymarket family is consistently prefixed, but overall the server mixes several conventions.
36 tools far exceeds the typically well-scoped range, and the server bundles what appear to be five separate concerns: Italian open data, Pipeworx universal query, entity/report utilities, prediction-market analytics, and meta/memory/subscription features. Many tools could be consolidated (e.g., ai_visibility_check and scan_competitor_ai_presence; discover_tools and suggest_questions), making the set feel bloated.
The broad domain of structured data research and prediction-market edge is largely covered: universal routing, grounded answers, deep research, entity resolution, profiles, comparisons, change feeds, claim verification, arbitrage scans, fill-risk, subscriptions, memory, and feedback. Minor gaps exist—no direct tool to fetch raw CKAN resource URLs, no exhaustive list of all 5,529 tools, and no actual order execution on prediction markets—but these are workable around.