Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
UnClick MCP Server

UnClick MCP Server

by malamutemayhem
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

upstash_kafka_list_topics

List all topics in an Upstash Kafka cluster using your API key, email, and cluster ID.

Instructions

List all topics in an Upstash Kafka cluster.

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": {
      "api_key": "<api_key>",
      "email": "<email>",
      "cluster_id": "<cluster_id>"
    },
    "name": "upstash_kafka_list_topics"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailYes
api_keyYes
cluster_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.1.9
  2. Removed
  3. Addedv0.1.5

TDQS

C2.5/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, placing full burden on the description. The description only states 'List all topics', but does not confirm it is read-only, disclose permissions, rate limits, or behavior on empty clusters. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 sentence, efficiently stating purpose. However, it omits essential details; every sentence should earn its place, and while concise, it does not add value beyond purpose. Still, it is appropriately brief.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With 3 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description fails to provide adequate context. The agent lacks understanding of inputs, outputs, and operational behavior, making the tool nearly unusable.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the input schema only provides names and types. The description does not explain any parameters (api_key, email, cluster_id), leaving their roles and formats entirely ambiguous.

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 'List all topics in an Upstash Kafka cluster', which specifies the verb (list), resource (topics), and scope (cluster). Among sibling tools like upstash_kafka_produce, this uniquely identifies its purpose.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. An agent has no context for deciding between this and other Upstash 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