Skip to main content
Glama
satorntcg

satorntcg-mcp-server

Official
by satorntcg

get_orders_missing_listings

Detect TCGplayer orders that never completed listing sync by comparing orders to listings; flags any order lacking an auto-created or manual listing, revealing missing inventory syncs.

Instructions

Find TCGplayer orders whose listing/inventory sync never completed — a direct comparison of tcgplayer_orders/tcgplayer_order_items against tcgplayer_listings, not an inference from quantity_listed or updated_at (those can shift for unrelated reasons, e.g. a price refresh, and give a false read). An order counts as synced if it has its own auto-created listing (tcgplayer_listings.notes = "Auto-created from TCGplayer order "), or if listing creation was correctly skipped because a manual listing already covered one of its cards within 3 days of the order date — the same duplicate-sale guard create_tcgplayer_order itself uses. An auto-created listing belonging to a different order never counts as coverage, since that guard only ever fires against manual listings. Anything else is flagged as missing, listing every line item on the order since a failed sync never lists any of them. Run with since set to the start of an order-capture run to catch a bad sync within the hour; run with no since for a full backlog sweep.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax number of missing orders to return. checked_count/missing_count still reflect the full since-filtered set.
sinceNoOptional ISO date/datetime — only check orders with created_at >= this. Omit to check every order on file.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the exact matching logic, the duplicate-sale guard, the false-positive risk from price refreshes, and the edge case where auto-created listings from other orders do not count as coverage. This is unusually transparent about how the tool computes results.

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 the core purpose and the most important caveat about false reads, followed by precise edge-case details that genuinely matter. It is long and dense, but no sentence is filler; a slightly tighter structure could make it easier to scan.

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 complex tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides the core output semantics ('listing every line item on the order') and covers all important matching/coverage rules. It stops short of explicitly describing the full response envelope, such as order fields or counts, but an agent still has enough to invoke it correctly.

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%, so the parameters are already documented. The description adds meaningful usage context for `since` by explaining when to set it versus omit it, and the `limit` parameter is already well explained by the schema. This is a clear improvement over the baseline, though it does not add much beyond the schema for `limit`.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'Find TCGplayer orders whose listing/inventory sync never completed.' It also distinguishes itself from naive alternatives by explaining that it is not an inference from quantity_listed or updated_at, which makes the purpose and scope unmistakable even among sibling order tools.

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?

It gives concrete guidance on when to invoke it: with `since` set to the start of an order-capture run to catch a bad sync quickly, or with no `since` for a full backlog sweep. It does not explicitly name an alternative or state when-not-to-use this tool, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it correctly.

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