Skip to main content
Glama

Look up a resource's fields

pc_get_resource
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get field dictionaries for Partner Center resources. Lists each field's name, type, and usage note to decode payloads or build request bodies.

Instructions

Return the field dictionary for a Partner Center resource — Customer, Subscription, Order, Invoice, CartLineItem and others — listing each field's name, type, and usage note. Use this to understand a payload you received or to work out what a request body needs. For the accepted values of an individual field use pc_get_enums, and for a ready-to-fill body skeleton for a specific operation use pc_build_request. Read-only, offline, deterministic. Omitting name returns the index of every resource instead of one resource's fields. An unknown name returns ok:false with suggestions listing all valid resource names.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoResource to expand, e.g. "Subscription" or "CartLineItem". Matched case-insensitively. Omit it to list every documented resource with its description and field count, then call again with the one you want.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesTrue when the call succeeded and `data` is populated; false when `error` explains why not.
dataNoThe result payload. Present only when `ok` is true.
errorNoHuman-readable reason the call failed. Present only when `ok` is false.
suggestionsNoValid values to retry with, returned alongside `error` when the requested identifier was not found.
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), the description adds highly relevant behavioral details: 'Read-only, offline, deterministic' plus expected behaviors when 'name' is omitted and for unknown names (returning ok:false with suggestions). No contradiction with annotations.

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 compact yet comprehensive. Each sentence earns its place: purpose, usage guidance, alternative tools, behavioral traits, and edge-case behavior. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and structured for quick scanning.

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 the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, rich output schema, strong annotations), the description is complete. It covers all key aspects needed by an agent: what it does, when to use it, how edge cases behave, and how it relates to sibling tools. No important information is missing.

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?

The schema already provides 100% coverage with a thorough description of the 'name' parameter (including case-insensitivity and omission behavior). The tool description does not add any parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource ('Return the field dictionary for a Partner Center resource') and lists concrete resource examples. It explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings by naming pc_get_enums and pc_build_request as alternative tools for different needs.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It clearly states when to use the tool ('understand a payload you received or to work out what a request body needs') and gives explicit alternatives for different use cases ('For the accepted values of an individual field use pc_get_enums, and for a ready-to-fill body skeleton use pc_build_request').

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/tunahanaliozturk/partner-center-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server