Skip to main content
Glama

rental_offers

Fetch public SPSP delegation rental offers with filters for player, price, quantity, and sort order. Limit results from 1 to 100 per request to analyze market bids.

Instructions

Read public SPSP delegation rental offers 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

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations to lean on, the description takes on the full burden and does it well. It discloses the single-GET behavior, absence of auto-pagination, local row/size limits, refusal of oversized records, wire string types, and forwarding behavior for filters. This is unusually rich behavioral disclosure.

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 tool's purpose and key limitations are front-loaded, and most sentences contain useful information. However, several empirical probe anecdotes ('Two pages of two transaction IDs matched the first four rows', 'A combined player... probe returned only...') are verbose and could be condensed into a single caution without losing value.

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 9 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers many critical operational details: pagination, truncation, filter caveats, type handling, and size limits. It falls short only in not clarifying sort/order/offset usage or response structure, but it is far more complete than a typical MCP tool description.

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 carry parameter meaning, and it does for limit, quantity bounds, price filters, player, and sort direction. It does not fully define sort/order/offset semantics, but it adds substantial value beyond the raw schema, especially the note that values are not rescaled and that other filters are forwarded without implied effectiveness.

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?

The description opens with 'Read public SPSP delegation rental offers' which names the verb, resource, and scope precisely. It further distinguishes itself with 'These are token delegation offers/bids, not card-worker rentals,' which helps an agent tell it apart from related rental tools.

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?

The description provides clear context: explicit limit range, no auto-fetching of continuation pages, and a strong caveat that filters are forwarded without implied effectiveness. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives like rental_offers_by_player or rental_offers_lowest_price, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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