Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Podyx MCP

Podyx MCP

by Studio-Red-Barcelona
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

podyx_get_cancellation

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a cancellation by UUID to review its current money and cancellation state, refund obligations, and replacement scope in read-only mode.

Instructions

Get cancellation GET /api/v2/cancellations/{id}. Acceptance is an immutable delivery receipt. A refund request reserves a real outstanding obligation; only a studio report of actual success counts returned money. Studio refund UUIDs are independent from HTTP keys. Replacements explicitly name a failed or reversed attempt in the identical frozen scope and share its obligation. GET exposes current money and cancellation state. Recovery requires current key, tenant and owning-resource authority even after new commercial entry is disabled. Provider IDs are never accepted or manufactured. Read/preview only. Follow all pagination; a quote does not reserve a slot or lock a price.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "podyx_get_cancellation"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the supplied annotations, the description adds useful behavioral context: recovery requires current key, tenant, and owning-resource authority; provider IDs are not accepted or manufactured; and pagination must be followed. These details go beyond readOnly/idempotent/openWorld annotations, though the surrounding refund/replacement wording is dense and partly distracting.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The opening sentence is front-loaded and useful, but the description then becomes a dense stream of domain rules about refunds, replacements, obligations, keys, and pagination. Much of this is not clearly tied to retrieving a cancellation and makes the definition harder to scan.

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?

For a simple annotated read-only GET tool, the description covers authority requirements and some state context, but with no output schema it only vaguely says the response exposes 'current money and cancellation state'. The return semantics remain underspecified and the relevance of the refund/replacement rules is unclear.

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 description coverage is 0% for the single nested path parameter, so the description should carry the semantic burden. It only shows the path template '/api/v2/cancellations/{id}' and does not explain what the id identifies, where to obtain it, or any constraints beyond the schema's uuid format.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The first sentence states a clear verb and resource: 'Get cancellation GET /api/v2/cancellations/{id}'. However, the description does not distinguish this tool from siblings such as podyx_get_subscription_cancellation or podyx_aftercare_cancellation_preview, and later sentences introduce refund and replacement concepts that blur the purpose.

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 says 'Read/preview only' and includes operational notes like following pagination, but it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance and does not name alternatives or conditions for choosing this tool over sibling cancellation-related tools.

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