Skip to main content
Glama

rental_bids

Query public SPSP delegation rental bids using filters for player, price range, quantity, and sorting, with pagination and a 100-row limit.

Instructions

Read public SPSP delegation rental bids with an explicit limit of 1 to 100. Two pages of two transaction IDs matched the first four rows. Quantity bounds worked, including a 10000 exact range. Price filters accepted integer 1 but rejected decimal 0.001 with HTTP 400; values are forwarded without rescaling. A combined player, amount-ascending, maxPrice=1 and quantity-range probe returned only the selected player and in-range quantities. Other combinations remain unmeasured. These are token delegation offers/bids, not card-worker rentals. Quantities, prices and escrow retain their wire string types. Makes one logical GET request Does not auto-fetch continuation pages. Required inputs reflect tool policy as well as measured upstream requirements. Other declared filters are forwarded as supplied; their effectiveness is not implied by the schema. The data list are locally limited to 100 rows and 256 KiB, with truncation reported in text and metadata. Oversized records are refused without partial fields.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortNo
limitYes
orderNo
offsetNo
playerNo
maxPriceNo
minPriceNo
maxQuantityNo
minQuantityNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / offset / maximum
      Added value: +9007199254740991
  2. First observedv0.0.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden and does so thoroughly. It reveals GET behavior, no automatic continuation-page fetching, local 100-row and 256 KiB limits, truncation reporting, refusal of oversized records, wire string types, and measured upstream quirks such as decimal price rejection with HTTP 400. This is unusually transparent about edge cases and limitations.

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?

The description is information-dense and front-loads the core purpose, but it is organized as a stream of empirical notes rather than a clean specification. It has grammatical issues such as 'Makes one logical GET request Does not auto-fetch continuation pages' and 'The data list are locally limited'. Every sentence adds value, but the overall structure could be tighter and clearer.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description covers a wide range of operational concerns: required inputs, pagination behavior, filter validation, data-size limits, truncation, and refusal of oversized records. It still leaves response field structure mostly unspecified and acknowledges that 'Other combinations remain unmeasured', so it is not fully complete, but it is strong for a tool with this much behavioral nuance.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does for several parameters: limit is explicitly bounded, price filters are shown to reject decimals and forward values without rescaling, quantity bounds are noted as functional, and player plus sort ordering appear in a tested combined probe. However, offset and minPrice are not individually explained, and only one sort/order value is hinted at, leaving some parameter semantics unresolved.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Read public SPSP delegation rental bids', which makes the tool's function immediately clear. It also disambiguates the domain by stating 'These are token delegation offers/bids, not card-worker rentals', helping distinguish it from the many rental-related sibling tools. The explicit mention of the 1-to-100 limit further sharpens what this tool does.

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?

The description implies a use case but does not state when to choose this tool over the closely related siblings such as rental_bids_by_player or rental_bids_lowest_price. It warns that these are token delegation bids, not card-worker rentals, but offers no explicit alternative routing or condition-based guidance. An agent still has to infer when this tool is the right one.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools