ebay_get_notification_config
Retrieve your current eBay notification settings to review or audit event subscriptions.
Instructions
Get notification configuration
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Retrieve your current eBay notification settings to review or audit event subscriptions.
Get notification configuration
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only says 'Get notification configuration' with no details on side effects, permissions, rate limits, or response behavior. This is insufficient for an AI agent to understand the tool's impact.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is extremely concise at three words, but it lacks substantive information. While there is no waste, the conciseness comes at the expense of clarity and completeness. It is not front-loaded with key details.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the simplicity of the tool (no parameters, no output schema), the description still feels incomplete. It does not explain what the notification configuration covers, how to interpret the result, or any related context. An agent would likely need additional information to use it correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
There are no parameters, and the input schema is an empty object (100% coverage). According to the rubric, high schema coverage yields a baseline of 3. The description does not add any parameter-level meaning, but no additional info is needed for parameters.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states 'Get notification configuration', which indicates a read operation on a configuration resource. However, it does not specify what is included in 'notification configuration' or how it differs from sibling tools like 'ebay_get_notification_subscription' or 'ebay_get_notification_destination'. The purpose is broadly clear but ambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or when other notification-related tools might be more appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/YosefHayim/ebay-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server