gingr-mcp

List pet owners

gingr_list_owners

Read-only

Retrieve a list of pet owners with names, contact details, and signup dates to analyze customer base size, growth, and retention.

Instructions

List pet owners (customers) from the connected Gingr facility — IDs, names, contact details, and signup dates. Use to analyze customer base size, growth, and retention.

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": "gingr_list_owners"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Max records to return (1–200, default 50)
`search`	No	Optional name or email substring to filter by

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 18, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's addition of return fields and purpose is helpful but not extensive. It does not disclose pagination behavior (though limit implies it), sorting, or other behavioral traits beyond what the annotations provide.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and contains no fluff or redundant information. Every sentence adds value.

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 the tool's low complexity (2 optional parameters, no output schema, read-only), the description covers the essential information: what is returned and why to use it. Minor gaps like ordering and timezone handling could be noted but are not critical for basic use.

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% and each parameter (limit, search) has a description. The tool description does not add further meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema already provides.

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 lists pet owners (customers) and specifies the returned fields (IDs, names, contact details, signup dates). It also explains the analytical use case. The sibling tools list different entities, so this tool is well-distinguished.

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 provides a clear context for when to use this tool ('analyze customer base size, growth, and retention'). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, which would be helpful for an AI agent.

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

Deploy Server