gumroad_get_offer_codeGet a single offer code on a product by id. Gumroad REST: GET /v2/products/{product_id}/offer_codes/{id}.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | The offer code id. | |
| product_id | Yes | The product id. |
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=true, and the description's GET method aligns with that. The description adds the REST path but no extra behavioral context like error cases, pagination, or return format. It does not contradict annotations.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and includes the REST endpoint for precision. No fluff or redundant information.
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?
For a simple get-by-id tool with two well-described params and no output schema, the description is sufficient. It clearly defines the scope (single offer code on a product) and the REST path. It could benefit from noting potential 404s, but this is not essential given the simplicity.
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 100%, with both 'id' and 'product_id' already described in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.
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 'Get a single offer code on a product by id,' identifying a specific verb and resource. The word 'single' distinguishes it from listing operations like gumroad_list_offer_codes, and the REST endpoint adds precision.
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 implies usage when you have a specific offer code ID, but it does not explicitly contrast with the sibling list tool or state when not to use it. Usage guidance is implied rather than stated.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct resource (product, offer code, license, sale, subscriber, user, variant category, custom field, resource subscription) with a specific action (get, list, create, update, enable, disable, verify). Even the license tools (enable, disable, verify) are clearly differentiated by their descriptions, and no two tools overlap in purpose.
All tools follow the consistent pattern of 'gumroad_' + verb (create, get, list, update, enable, disable, verify) + noun in snake_case. The verbs and nouns are uniformly chosen, making the API predictable and easy to navigate.
20 tools is in the 16-25 range that feels heavy, but the breadth is justified by Gumroad's multiple resource types. However, the number leans toward the upper bound, and some resources have only partial CRUD coverage, so the count is borderline.
The tool set is read-heavy: products lack create/update/delete, offer codes lack delete, resource subscriptions lack create/delete, and custom fields only have list. These significant gaps prevent agents from performing full lifecycle management, which will cause failures for common workflows like publishing a new product.