affiliate-networks-mcp

affiliate_growsurf_verify_auth

Check GrowSurf credentials by calling an authenticated endpoint. Use this after key rotation, at session start, or when an auth error occurs to confirm valid access and return identity details.

Instructions

Verify the configured credentials for GrowSurf are valid by calling a minimal authenticated endpoint. Use this at the start of a session, after rotating keys, or when another operation returns an auth error. Returns {ok:true, identity?} or {ok:false, reason}; pair with affiliate_run_diagnostic for a full health check.

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": {
      "brand": "<brand>"
    },
    "name": "affiliate_growsurf_verify_auth"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`brand`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.20.0Jul 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, but the description reveals the endpoint type and return shape ({ok:true, identity?} or {ok:false, reason}), adding useful behavioral context. It doesn't mention rate limits or side effects, though a read-only auth check likely has none.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is three concise sentences covering purpose, usage timing, and return format. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

For a simple auth-check tool, it covers purpose, usage context, return format, and a complementary diagnostic tool. The only notable gap is the undocumented 'brand' parameter, but the overall tool is simple enough that this is a minor omission.

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?

The schema has a single required 'brand' string with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description never explains what 'brand' refers to or how it maps to GrowSurf credentials, leaving the agent uncertain.

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 clearly states the tool verifies GrowSurf credentials via a minimal authenticated endpoint, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the many sibling verify_auth tools by naming GrowSurf explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit usage triggers: 'at the start of a session, after rotating keys, or when another operation returns an auth error.' It also mentions pairing with affiliate_run_diagnostic for a full health check, offering a clear alternative.

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

Deploy Server