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 declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering safety. Description adds return fields and default behavior (active only). No contradictions, but no additional behavioral details beyond annotations and usage hint.
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 concise sentences: first defines function and return fields, second gives actionable guidance. No redundant or extraneous content.
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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, return structure, and usage intent. No gaps identified.
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 provides 100% description for the single parameter include_inactive. Description reinforces purpose by mentioning 'active subscriptions' and tying the parameter to finding ids to cancel, adding contextual value beyond schema.
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?
Clear verb 'list' with specific resource 'subscriptions' and scope 'caller's active'. Differentiates from sibling tools like subscribe and unsubscribe by focusing on listing rather than creation or deletion.
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?
Explicitly states when to use: 'to review what you're monitoring before adding more or to find an id to cancel'. Implicitly ties to sibling tools subscribe and unsubscribe, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance.
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, ask_pipeworx_grounded, and deep_research all route broad factual questions; ai_visibility_check and scan_competitor_ai_presence overlap heavily; and the Polymarket tools blur into each other. The five PayPal tools are distinct, but the rest of the set has real boundary ambiguity.
Names are almost entirely snake_case and mostly follow a verb_noun or domain_prefix pattern (paypal_*, pipeworx_*, polymarket_*). Minor deviations like entity_profile, recent_alerts, and pipeworx_feedback are noun-phrase style, but the overall convention is predictable and readable.
A server named 'Paypal' exposes 36 tools, only five of which relate to PayPal. The remaining 31 are a grab bag of Pipeworx data lookups, Polymarket betting tools, memory helpers, and subscription utilities. This is an extreme scope mismatch for the apparent domain.
The PayPal surface is read-only: it can list/get invoices, list transactions, list disputes, and get an order, but has no create, update, send, capture, refund, or dispute-response operations. Even if the unrelated tools are ignored, a meaningful PayPal workflow is left incomplete.