Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
kernl

kernl

by fastslack
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

kernel_store_browse

Browse paid extensions in the store and see which ones your current license already unlocks. Read-only.

Instructions

List the paid extensions available in the Kernl store and show which ones your current license already unlocks. Read-only.

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": "kernel_store_browse"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the most important trait, that the tool is read-only, and that results are scoped to the caller's current license, which is genuinely useful context. It says nothing about result volume, pagination, or what happens for a caller with no license, and it leaves return shape to the output schema.

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?

Two short sentences with zero waste: the listing behavior comes first and the license scope follows. The trailing 'Read-only.' is a deliberate, cheap safety signal given the absence of annotations.

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 zero-parameter, read-only lister with an output schema available, the description covers what is listed and the license-scoping behavior, which is most of what an agent needs. Only minor details, such as pagination or behavior for unlicensed callers, are missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to disambiguate, and it correctly adds no noise about inputs.

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 and resource: list paid extensions in the Kernl store, plus a second behavior, which extensions the current license unlocks. That is more than a restatement of the name. It does not name or distinguish itself from the sibling marketplace/store tools, so it stops short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage for browsing and license-checking, but it never says when to choose this over kernel_marketplace_browse, kernel_marketplace_catalog_browse, or the install and update tools. There are no explicit exclusions or prerequisites beyond the implicit requirement of an active license.

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