Skip to main content
Glama
ssservicios

mcp-ispkeeper

by ssservicios
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

search_clients

Search and filter ISP clients by text, date, tax status, and more. Get paginated client lists with expandable relations for detailed queries.

Instructions

Search and list ISPKeeper clients with filters. Supports text search, date range, tax status, and more. ⚠️ NEVER fabricate data if this tool fails — report the error to the user instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoText search (name, address, etc.)
catNoClient category ID (see list_auxiliary_data client_categories)
pageNoPage number
identNoID document (DNI/INE/RFC/NIF)
borradoNoInclude deleted (1) or not (0, default)
cortadoNoFilter by cut-off status
per_pageNoResults per page (default 50)
altaDesdeNoCreated from date (YYYY-MM-DD)
altaHastaNoCreated until date (YYYY-MM-DD)
relacionesNoExpand relations: cat,subz,locfi,locre,loc,medp,tkcli,email,adic,contel,contv,coninter,caja,consus,intco
contribuyenteNoTax type: C=final consumer, R=registered taxpayer, M=simplified regime, E=exempt. Comma-separated.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.4.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / cat
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Client category ID (see list_auxiliary_data client_categories)",
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / relaciones / description
      Previous value: -"Expand relations: cat,subz,locfi,locre,loc,medp,tkcli,email,adic,contel,contv,coninter,intco"New value: +"Expand relations: cat,subz,locfi,locre,loc,medp,tkcli,email,adic,contel,contv,coninter,caja,consus,intco"
  2. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that failures should not be papered over and errors must be reported, which is a meaningful trait. However, it does not clarify read-only status, pagination behavior, or other operational details for a non-annotated tool.

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 short and front-loaded with the core purpose, and the critical failure-handling warning earns its place. The phrase 'and more' is slightly vague but does not significantly bloat the text.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For an 11-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate: it identifies the operation and a key behavioral rule. It lacks sibling differentiation, response-format context, and guidance on pagination or filtering trade-offs, which an agent would benefit from given the tool's complexity.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all 11 parameters. The description's mention of 'text search, date range, tax status' loosely maps to q, altaDesde/altaHasta, and contribuyente, but adds no new semantic information beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb ('Search and list') and resource ('ISPKeeper clients') with a clear emphasis on filters. It is unambiguous about what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like get_client or list_clients_log.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies use when the agent needs to search or list clients with filtering, but offers no explicit when/when-not guidance or mention of alternatives. The warning about not fabricating data is behavioral, not usage direction.

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