shiply

Unpublish a listing (set to draft)

delete_listing

Destructive

Take a listing off the public marketplace by moving it to status='draft'. Marketplace v1 keeps the row so analytics + future re-listing work — there's no hard delete. Sold listings can't be modified. Use to stop accepting offers without losing pricing history.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`siteSlug`	Yes	slug of the listed site to unpublish

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

Changed2 schema fields changedJun 23, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / siteSlug / description

Added value: +"slug of the listed site to unpublish"

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "result": {}
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "result"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedJun 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, description reveals the soft-delete nature (keeps row, enables re-listing), the status change to draft, and the restriction on sold listings, adding valuable behavioral context.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three concise sentences front-load the purpose, include key details, and contain no fluff.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With a single param fully described, annotations providing destructiveness context, and the description covering behavior, usage, and constraints, the tool is fully specified for correct invocation.

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?

Only parameter siteSlug is well-described in schema (100% coverage). Description does not add further meaning to the parameter, which is acceptable given the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the verb 'take a listing off the public marketplace' and the resource 'listing', distinguishes from hard delete, and notes sold listings can't be modified, differentiating it from siblings like update_listing.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states when to use: 'Use to stop accepting offers without losing pricing history' and notes constraints (sold listings can't be modified), providing clear guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All shiply tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Many tools have overlapping purposes (e.g., add_domain, add_subdomain, add_custom_domain, add_sending_domain) or similar names like check_domain and check_custom_domain, which can confuse an agent. While descriptions help, the sheer number of closely related tools makes it difficult to consistently select the correct one.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern, but there are exceptions like 'read_thread' (instead of get_thread) and 'mark_thread_read' (verb_noun_verb). Prefixes like 'data_' are used inconsistently with other tools, but overall the naming is still readable.

Tool Count1/5

With 103 tools, the server is extremely bloated. Even for a comprehensive platform, this count overwhelms any agent and makes the tool surface difficult to navigate. Many tools could be merged or are too granular.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers a wide range of operations across sites, domains, email, marketplace, projects, contracts, and functions. While some updates (e.g., general contract editing) are missing, the surface is mostly comprehensive for the domain.

Resources

Need Help?