Skip to main content
Glama

Ecommerce Product Copy from Archive Colour

ecommerce_copy
Read-only

Generate complete ecommerce product copy for any colour. Input: hex + product type + tone + channel. Output: colour name, product title, short description, long description, SEO title, meta description, alt text, Instagram caption, and cross-sell suggestion. Every piece of copy is grounded in archive provenance -- never generic AI colour copy. The colour name comes from the nearest archive match, not invented. Examples: velvet cushion in Murex Luxury, ceramic vase in Woad Vat Blue, linen throw in Standlake Silt. Directly useful for Shopify, WooCommerce, and editorial product pages.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hexYesHex colour of the product e.g. '#4A2A50'
toneNoCopy tone e.g. 'premium but not pompous', 'warm and accessible', 'heritage and serious'premium but not pompous
channelNoSales channel e.g. 'shopify', 'etsy', 'instagram', 'editorial'shopify
brand_nameNoOptional brand name to include in copy
product_typeYesProduct type e.g. 'velvet cushion', 'ceramic vase', 'linen throw', 'candle'

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "additionalProperties": true,
      +  "description": "Structured JSON response. Shape varies by tool; most return an 'ok' boolean plus a 'result' or 'results' field with the tool's data payload.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
      -  "properties": {
      -    "error": {
      -      "type": "string"
      -    },
      -    "ok": {
      -      "type": "boolean"
      -    },
      -    "result": {
      -      "type": [
      -        "object",
      -        "array",
      -        "string",
      -        "null"
      -      ]
      -    }
      -  },
      -  "type": "object"
      -}New value: +null
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context: copy is grounded in archive provenance, colour names come from the nearest archive match rather than being invented. This goes beyond the annotation by explaining the underlying data source and generation philosophy, providing useful transparency about the tool's behaviour.

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 and information-dense, covering what it does, inputs, outputs, unique value, examples, and use cases in a single paragraph. Every sentence adds value, and the most important action is stated first. It avoids unnecessary fluff.

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?

The description provides a thorough overview of the tool's purpose, inputs, outputs, examples, and applicability. Given the output schema exists and there are no complex side effects or destructive actions, the description is nearly complete. It could mention edge cases like unavailable archive matches, but that is not essential for basic usage.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces parameter purposes through examples (velvet cushion, ceramic vase, linen throw) and mentions the input combination (hex + product type + tone + channel). It does not add significant new semantic detail beyond what the schema already documents, but the examples provide practical context.

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 generates complete ecommerce product copy from a hex colour, listing specific inputs and outputs. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ecommerce_namer by covering full copy (titles, descriptions, SEO, social) rather than just naming.

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 clear context for use ('Directly useful for Shopify, WooCommerce, and editorial product pages'), implying suitable scenarios. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use this tool versus other colour/copy tools.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources