Podyx MCP

podyx_get_subscription_plan

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a subscription plan by UUID to review current plan details, pricing, options, and addons, with page controls for nested collections.

Instructions

Get subscription-plans GET /api/v2/subscription-plans/{id}. Packages owns JSON normalization, scoped references, computed prices, version snapshots and lifecycle. Public authoring permits repairable drafts and never grants. Omitted options/addons preserve; [] clears. Authoring scope=private/all also requires clients:read. view=offers uses current public purchasability and excludes private plans; images and terms are available for display. options_page/options_per_page and addons_page/addons_per_page independently bound nested collections. Private commands require clients:read. Direct grants separately require grant. Subscription sales require resend_payment_link; bundle sales use create/update authority. Explicit bundle payment-link saves use the shared default validity window when omitted, including private edits; resends preserve the stored deadline. Bundle grants remain open-ended; subscription private deadlines and targets are immutable. Archive deactivates without changing prior purchases. UUID Idempotency-Key required; replay checks current authority and returns immutable acceptance only. GET reads current state. 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_subscription_plan"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	Yes
`query`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.4.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, and the description is consistent with that ("Read/preview only"). It adds two genuinely useful behavioral notes — that pagination must be followed exhaustively and that a quote does not reserve a slot or lock a price — but buries them under irrelevant disclosure about archive, idempotency keys, grants, and lifecycle that a GET never performs, which risks mispriming the agent.

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 endpoint identification is front-loaded, but the body is a long undifferentiated stream of sentences covering many unrelated operations with no grouping or filtering for a read tool. Most sentences do not earn their place for this specific tool and the reader must sift for the two or three relevant clauses.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a two-parameter read with no output schema, the description should cover what is returned and how the nested options/addons collections behave, plus read-permission expectations. It gestures at nested pagination but omits return shape, not-found/private-plan behavior, and instead spends its length on write-path rules that do not apply.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden, and it does clarify that options_page/options_per_page and addons_page/addons_per_page independently bound nested collections — meaning not otherwise available. Offsetting this, it describes parameters that do not exist in the schema (`view`, client scope, grant, idempotency key), and says nothing about the required path.id.

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 opening sentence does name a specific verb and resource plus the exact endpoint ("Get subscription-plans GET /api/v2/subscription-plans/{id}"), which is enough to identify a single-plan fetch. However, the remaining text is dominated by authoring, archive, grant, and payment-link semantics that belong to write tools, muddying what this tool actually does. It also never distinguishes itself from the sibling list tool podyx_list_subscription_plan.

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?

Only the fragments "GET reads current state" and "Read/preview only" indicate usage context, and neither says when to pick this over podyx_list_subscription_plan or the quote tools. The guidance that does exist references a `view=offers` option that is not a parameter of this tool, so the routing advice is partly inapplicable.

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

Deploy Server