get_available_services_for_marketplaceRetrieve available services for a specific marketplace to determine which offerings can be sold or subscribed there. Use the marketplace ID and optional filters to narrow results.
GetAvailableServicesForMarketplace.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| filters | No | ||
| marketplaceId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure — and it discloses nothing. It does not say whether results are paginated, filtered server-side, permission-gated, or what the return shape is.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
It is short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness: a single restated identifier that earns no place as a description. There is no front-loaded useful information because there is no information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
A two-parameter tool with a completely untyped 'filters' array, zero schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema requires substantially more description than this. An agent cannot confidently construct a call from what is given.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for two undocumented parameters and does not. Neither 'marketplaceId' (its source or validity) nor 'filters' (an untyped array with no item schema — what filter objects are accepted?) is explained anywhere.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description is the tool name restated in PascalCase with a period, adding no information beyond the title. The verb+resource ('get available services for marketplace') is derivable from the name itself, so the description contributes nothing. It also fails to distinguish this from the sibling 'list_marketplace_services' or 'get_possible_services_for_parent'.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. An agent has no basis for choosing this over the closely-related 'list_marketplace_services' sibling.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.