Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
webshare-mcp

webshare-mcp

by jimmyallinai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

webshare_plan

View Webshare plan details such as price, bandwidth limit, proxy count, monthly replacements/refreshes, and add-on toggles; omit plan_id to inspect the current subscription.

Instructions

查看套餐详情：价格、流量上限、代理数量、每月替换与刷新额度、附加项开关。不传 plan_id 时用当前订阅的套餐。

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": "webshare_plan"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
plan_idNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

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. '查看' implies a safe read, and the fallback-to-current-subscription behavior is a genuine behavioral disclosure. However, it says nothing about permissions, failure modes when plan_id is invalid, or whether the plan list is discoverable elsewhere.

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, zero waste: the first front-loads the returned fields, the second covers the one parameter's default. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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 single optional-param read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is nearly self-sufficient — it effectively documents the return fields and the parameter default. Only the source of valid plan_ids and the relationship to webshare_subscription 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate — and it does, explaining that plan_id is optional and that omitting it defaults to the current subscription's plan. That is real semantic value the bare `integer` schema cannot convey. It does not say where valid plan_ids come from.

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?

The description gives a specific verb ('查看') and resource ('套餐详情') and enumerates exactly what is returned: price, traffic limit, proxy count, monthly replacement/refresh quota, and add-on toggles. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling webshare_subscription, though the mention of the current subscription's plan hints at the relationship.

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?

It gives one useful usage rule — omit plan_id to fall back to the current subscription's plan — but never says when to prefer this tool over webshare_subscription, or what happens when no active subscription exists. Usage context is implied rather than stated.

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