Skip to main content
Glama

List a listing's coupon codes

list_coupons
Read-only

One of the user's listings' coupon codes, newest first: what each takes off a buyer's first purchase and their subscription to its updates, which plans it's for, its limits, how many buyers have used it (redemption_count), and whether it still works (active?).

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": {
      "input": "<input>",
      "context": "<context>"
    },
    "name": "list_coupons"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortNo
inputYes
limitNoThe maximum number of records to return
filterNoA filter to apply to the query: either a condition {"field": ..., "operator": ..., "value": ...} or an {"and": [...]} / {"or": [...]} group of conditions and groups (nestable). Operators: contains, eq, greater_than, greater_than_or_equal, ilike, in, is_distinct_from, is_nil, is_not_distinct_from, less_than, less_than_or_equal, like, not_eq, string_ends_with, string_starts_with. For 'is_nil' the value is true or false; for 'in' the value is an array. Fields: id, code, purchase_percent_off, subscription_percent_off, subscription_periods, base_plan_eligible, plan_ids, max_redemptions, expires_at, discontinued_at, inserted_at, updated_at, listing_id, redemption_count, active?, prices.
offsetNoThe number of records to skip
contextYesExplain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. Never include personal data, such as names, email addresses or message text; refer to people by role, such as "the user" or "a buyer".
result_typeNoThe type of result to returnrun_query

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Explain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. Never include personal data, such as names, email addresses or message text; refer to people by role, such as \"the user\" or \"a buyer\".",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "input"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "input",
      +  "context"
      +]
  2. Added

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral value by disclosing the default sort order ('newest first') and the meaning of the computed fields redemption_count and active?, but says nothing about pagination, result_type modes, or filtering behavior.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

It is a single sentence with no filler, and the resource is front-loaded, but it is a long comma-chained fragment whose main content is a field inventory rather than a statement of what the tool does.

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?

With no output schema, describing returned fields and their semantics is legitimately useful and mostly done here. However, for a read tool with 7 parameters including filter/limit/offset/result_type, the definition never explains returned shape or pagination, leaving the agent to reconstruct behavior from the schema alone.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 71%, and the description adds no guidance on any of the 7 parameters: listing_id (undocumented in the schema), limit, offset, filter, result_type, or context. Field names it mentions (redemption_count, active?, plan_ids implicitly) are already enumerated in the schema, so there is little meaning added beyond the structured fields for a coverage level that is not high enough to excuse the gap.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description names the resource precisely (a listing's coupon codes) and its default ordering ('newest first'), but it is written as a noun-phrase field catalog with no action verb; the verb 'List' exists only in the title. An agent can infer it returns coupons for one listing, but not how that differs from siblings such as create_coupon or update_coupon.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no statement of when to call this versus the sibling coupon tools (create_coupon, update_coupon, discontinue_coupon) and no prerequisite about the required listing_id. Usage is only implied by the resource noun.

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.

Resources