KDP Niche Research
Server Details
Kindle niche intelligence (demand/competition/BSR/revenue) gated by x402 USDC on Base.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.6/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
The two tools have clear and distinct purposes: list_niches provides an overview of available niches, while research_niche dives into specifics for a single keyword. No overlap or ambiguity.
Both tools follow a consistent 'verb_noun' naming pattern (list_niches, research_niche). The convention is uniform and predictable.
With only two tools, the server is minimal but focused. It covers the essential discovery and research steps for niche research, which is appropriate for a paid, specialized service. A few more tools (e.g., for comparing niches) would be welcome, but the current count is not unreasonable.
The tool surface covers the basic workflow of listing and researching a niche, but lacks tools for saving, comparing, or acting on research results. Notable gaps include the inability to manage payment settings or retrieve historical data, which limits the usefulness for advanced workflows.
Available Tools
2 toolslist_nichesAInspect
List available KDP niche keywords ordered by demand score.
Use this to discover what Kindle publishing niches are available for
detailed research. Returns keywords ordered by demand score (highest first).
This endpoint is free — no payment required.
Args:
limit: Number of results to return (1-100, default 20)
offset: Pagination offset (default 0)| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| offset | No |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions the endpoint is free and returns results ordered by demand score, but does not explicitly state it is read-only or disclose any side effects or authentication requirements. The verb 'List' implies no mutation, but more direct clarity would improve the score.
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 well-structured with a clear first sentence, then a usage context note, free disclosure, and structured parameter definitions under 'Args:'. It is efficient with minimal redundancy, though the parameter definitions could be integrated more concisely.
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 an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values in detail, but it does mention 'Returns keywords ordered by demand score (highest first)'. It provides pagination parameters and a free note. For a list tool, it is fairly complete, though it could clarify offset behavior (e.g., 0-based).
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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It fully explains both parameters: 'limit' (number of results 1-100, default 20) and 'offset' (pagination offset, default 0), adding meaning beyond the schema's type and default values.
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 KDP niche keywords ordered by demand score, using specific verbs 'List' and 'discover'. It distinguishes from the sibling 'research_niche' by implying this is for initial discovery before detailed research.
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 explicitly says 'Use this to discover what Kindle publishing niches are available for detailed research', providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, though the sibling tool 'research_niche' implies a different use case.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
research_nicheAInspect
Get detailed KDP niche intelligence for a specific keyword.
Returns demand score, competition score, Amazon BSR range, estimated
monthly revenue, review threshold, average book pricing, and data
freshness for the given Kindle publishing niche.
Pricing tiers (x402 USDC on Base network):
- $0.03 per query for cached/pre-seeded keywords
- $0.10 per query for live on-demand research (new keywords)
Use the free `list_niches` tool first to see available keywords.
Payment options:
1. Set the KDP_X_PAYMENT environment variable on the server for auto-pay.
2. Pass a valid x402 payment header via the x_payment argument.
3. If neither is set, the tool returns structured 402 payment instructions
that an x402-capable agent can use to construct and retry payment.
Args:
keyword: The KDP niche keyword to research (e.g. "romance novels", "keto cookbook")
x_payment: Optional base64-encoded x402 payment header. Takes precedence
over the KDP_X_PAYMENT environment variable.| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| keyword | Yes | ||
| x_payment | No |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses pricing, payment methods, and the possibility of returning 402 payment instructions. No contradictions present.
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 well-structured with clear sections but is slightly verbose. All information is relevant and earns its place.
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 description covers parameter details, usage flow, payment, and references the sibling tool. An output schema exists, so return values are covered externally.
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 input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description thoroughly explains the 'keyword' parameter with examples and the 'x_payment' parameter with its precedence and format.
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 provides 'detailed KDP niche intelligence' for a specific keyword and lists the returned metrics. It distinguishes from sibling tool 'list_niches' by referencing it as a free precursor.
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 explicitly instructs to use 'list_niches' first to see available keywords. It details payment options and when the tool returns payment instructions, guiding the agent on proper usage flow.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!