Billboardbug MCP

List my deals

list_my_deals

Read-only

Fetch a paginated list of deals owned by the API key's account, with limit and offset controls.

Instructions

List deals owned by the API key's account.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_my_deals"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`offset`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.1Oct 17, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the bar is lower. The description adds the meaningful scoping constraint that results are limited to the API key's own account rather than filterable by user, but it says nothing about pagination or result limits despite exposing limit/offset.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

A single efficient sentence with the scoping detail front-loaded and no filler. It is arguably too terse, but nothing in it is wasted.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description does not indicate the return shape, pagination behavior, or default limit, which matter for a list tool with limit/offset. It is adequate for identification but incomplete for correct invocation.

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% and both parameters (limit with maximum 100, offset with minimum 0) are undocumented in the schema. The description mentions neither, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap on a paginated listing tool.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (deals) plus a clear scope: deals owned by the API key's account. It implicitly distinguishes itself from search_deals (query-based) and get_deal (single), but never names a sibling explicitly.

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 gives no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as search_deals for filtered queries or get_deal for a single record. Usage must be inferred entirely from the name and the phrase 'owned by the API key's account'.

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

Deploy Server