Skip to main content
Glama
jlsookiki

Secondhand MCP

by jlsookiki
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Hybrid

Server Quality Checklist

67%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v0.4.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: listing available marketplaces, searching across them, and retrieving full details for a specific listing. No overlap in functionality.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case: list_marketplaces, search_marketplace, get_listing_details. Predictable and clear.

    Tool Count4/5

    Three tools is minimal but covers the essential operations for the domain. While more tools could be added (e.g., filter management), the current set is well-scoped and not excessive.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool surface covers the core needs: listing marketplaces, searching items, and getting details. Minor gap: search_marketplace has an incomplete description after 'Supports:', but functionally it covers multiple marketplaces. No dead ends.

  • Average 3.9/5 across 3 of 3 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • 0 of 2 community issues answered or closed in the last 6 months
    • 8 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • Last stable release on
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI status not available

  • This repository is licensed under MIT License.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior3/5

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

    With no annotations, the description correctly indicates a read-only listing operation. However, it does not disclose potential behavioral details such as pagination (though likely unnecessary due to no parameters), rate limits, or the exact meaning of 'status'. The description is adequate but not comprehensive.

    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?

    The description is a single, clear sentence that conveys the essential information without unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise, though it could benefit from being split into purpose and output details for improved scannability.

    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?

    For a simple tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and output scope. However, it lacks detail on the structure of the response (e.g., what fields beyond 'status' are included), making it somewhat incomplete for an agent lacking additional context.

    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 input schema has no parameters, so the description adds value by indicating the output will include 'all available marketplaces and their status'. This provides semantic context beyond the empty schema, though it could be more explicit about the output fields.

    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 clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'all available marketplaces', and specifies the output includes 'their status'. It effectively conveys the tool's function, though it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_listing_details or search_marketplace.

    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 when a complete list of marketplaces with status is needed, but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives (e.g., when details of a specific marketplace are required, use get_listing_details).

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

  • Behavior3/5

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

    With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It describes outputs per marketplace and mentions that includeImages can return base64 images, but does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, idempotent, or has no side effects. The focus is on return fields rather than behavioral traits like rate limits or authentication needs.

    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?

    The description is front-loaded with purpose and then efficiently breaks down per-marketplace details. While it is somewhat lengthy, every sentence adds value by specifying what each marketplace returns. It avoids unnecessary words and maintains clarity.

    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?

    Given no output schema and no annotations, the description effectively covers the main purpose and per-marketplace output. It mentions that the ID comes from search results, which ties to sibling usage. However, it lacks details on error cases, prerequisites, or output structure beyond field lists.

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

    Parameters3/5

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

    Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters beyond what the input schema already provides (listingId, marketplace, includeImages). The per-marketplace details are about output, not parameters, so no extra value for parameter semantics.

    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 'Get full details for a specific listing using an ID from search results,' specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes between multiple marketplaces (Facebook, eBay, Depop, Poshmark) and their respective return fields, which differentiates it from siblings like search_marketplace.

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

    Usage Guidelines4/5

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

    The description implies the tool is used after search_marketplace by mentioning 'using an ID from search results,' and details what each marketplace returns, aiding selection. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternatives beyond the implied sequence.

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

  • Behavior4/5

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

    No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses behavioral traits: auth needs (eBay API keys, Chrome for Depop/Poshmark), pagination (eBay offset+limit, auto-paginate), and that sold items can be shown. It does not mention rate limits or error handling, but covers key aspects.

    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?

    The description is structured into paragraphs per marketplace with a summary at the start and sibling tool reference at the end. It is relatively concise for the complexity, though there is an empty bullet after 'Supports:' which is a minor formatting issue.

    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?

    Given 16 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description fairly covers the tool's purpose, supported marketplaces, return fields, and key behavior. It references get_listing_details for extended info. It could mention output format or error scenarios, but is largely complete.

    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 100%, baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining marketplace-specific parameter behavior (e.g., offset only for eBay, category options per platform, condition filter differences). It provides examples and clarifications beyond schema descriptions.

    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 searches for items on secondary marketplaces, lists supported platforms (Facebook, eBay, Depop, Poshmark) and mentions return fields. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_listing_details, which provides full details.

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

    Usage Guidelines4/5

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

    The description explains when to use the tool (searching marketplaces) and references get_listing_details for more info. It mentions auth requirements for eBay and browser dependencies for Depop/Poshmark, but does not explicitly state when not to use or alternative tools for specific marketplaces.

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

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

secondhand-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

secondhand-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/jlsookiki/secondhand-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server