Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
gingr-mcp

gingr-mcp

by shashicandev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List services

gingr_list_services
Read-only

Access a list of facility services with IDs, names, descriptions, and prices to analyze offerings before making pricing or marketing decisions.

Instructions

List the services offered at the facility (boarding tiers, grooming packages, daycare options, etc.) with IDs, names, descriptions, and prices. Use to understand the offering before recommending pricing or marketing.

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_services"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so no behavioral contradiction. The description adds that it returns IDs, names, descriptions, and prices, but does not elaborate on other traits like potential rate limits or response format.

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?

Two sentences: first lists returned fields, second gives usage guidance. No wasted words, front-loaded information.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given no parameters or output schema, the description completely specifies what the tool does and when to use it. No gaps for a simple list tool.

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?

No parameters exist, so schema description coverage is 100%. Baseline for 0 params is 4, but per rubric with high coverage baseline is 3. Description adds no parameter info since none are needed.

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 it lists services with IDs, names, descriptions, and prices, and gives examples (boarding tiers, grooming packages, daycare options). It distinguishes from sibling list tools by specifying the domain.

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 explicitly says 'Use to understand the offering before recommending pricing or marketing,' providing clear usage context. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives but is specific enough.

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