Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@ktmcp/beezup

@ktmcp/beezup

by ktmcp-cli
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

GetStoreTrackingStatus

Check the synchronization status of clicks and orders for a store. Monitor if your data is up to date.

Instructions

Get the synchronization status of clicks and orders of a store

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": "GetStoreTrackingStatus"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully convey behavior. It only states 'Get', implying a read operation, but lacks details on side effects, authentication, rate limits, or what 'synchronization status' entails. The tool could have hidden behaviors not disclosed.

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 very concise (one sentence, 12 words). It is front-loaded and direct. However, it may be overly terse; a bit more context (e.g., 'Returns a summary of...') would improve completeness without losing conciseness.

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?

Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It explains what the tool returns, but lacks context about the return format or how it differs from similar tools. For a simple tool, it's acceptable but not rich.

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 zero parameters, so no parameter descriptions are needed. The description adds no parameter information, but with 100% schema coverage and no params, this is acceptable. A higher score would require explaining what the absence of parameters means (e.g., globally scoped).

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 it retrieves synchronization status of clicks and orders for a store. However, it doesn't differentiate from similar siblings like 'GetTrackingStatus' or 'GetStoreTrackedClicks', which may cause confusion about which tool to use for what granularity of data.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, use cases, or when not to use it, which is critical given the large number of sibling tools.

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