Skip to main content
Glama

Subscribe

subscribe

Subscribe to namespace/ or namespace/doc_key_prefix; returns subscription_id and a cursor for poll_events(subscription_id=..., cursor=...). Same name replaces.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "prefixes": "<prefixes>"
    },
    "name": "subscribe"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNodefault
typesNo
prefixesYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description adds genuinely new behavior by disclosing replace-by-name semantics ('Same name replaces') and the return contract. It still omits what happens to an existing cursor/undelivered events when a name is replaced, and says nothing about the 50-prefix cap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two dense clauses, front-loaded with scope and then the return/consumption contract, with no filler. The telegraphic style ('namespace/doc_key_prefix') is efficient rather than vague, though it borders on terse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. Still missing for a stateful subscription tool: what 'types' accepts, the max-50-prefix limit, and whether re-subscribing under the same name resets progress.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load; it does well on the required 'prefixes' param by explaining the 'namespace/' vs 'namespace/doc_key_prefix' forms. However, the 'types' filter and the 'name' parameter's role as identity/default are only obliquely hinted at via 'Same name replaces'.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Subscribe to namespace/ or namespace/doc_key_prefix') and names the concrete output artifacts (subscription_id, cursor), which makes clear what the tool establishes. It does not explicitly differentiate against sibling list_subscriptions or unsubscribe, so it falls short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives a clear follow-up workflow by naming the consuming tool and exact call shape: poll_events(subscription_id=..., cursor=...). It does not state when not to use it, nor mention unsubscribe for teardown, so explicit exclusions are missing.

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.