Free multi-surface storefront readiness snapshot (UCP/ACP discovery, product schema, robots, answer-engine maps). Not an attested Store Guard grade. Response includes a Store Guard $149 CTA. No API key required.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Public storefront URL or domain |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool is free, includes a Store Guard $149 CTA, requires no API key, and does not provide an attested grade. These are important behavioral traits that help an agent set expectations, though it doesn't describe return format or side effects.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by important caveats. No redundant or irrelevant information, making it concise and well-structured.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers key aspects: what it does, what it isn't, cost, and key requirements. It doesn't detail the return structure, but the mention of 'snapshot' and the CTA provides enough context for selection and invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% for the only parameter 'url', which is described as 'Public storefront URL or domain'. The description adds minimal extra meaning, just mentioning 'storefront' and 'No API key required', which aligns with the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already provides adequate semantics.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states it provides a 'storefront readiness snapshot' and enumerates specific coverage areas (UCP/ACP discovery, product schema, robots, answer-engine maps). This gives a specific verb-like action ('snapshot') and resource, but it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like dispatch.*. However, the scope is clear enough.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage context: it's free, requires no API key, and is not an attested grade, suggesting it's for quick preliminary checks. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or mention any sibling tools, leaving exclusion criteria implicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool serves a clearly distinct purpose: readiness probe, cost estimation, evals metrics, trade catalog, order creation, and instant quotes. The overlap between dispatch.estimate and dispatch.quote is explicitly disambiguated by authentication and purpose (keyless rate-card vs. authenticated quoted price), so there is no boundary confusion.
All tools follow a consistent dotted-prefix pattern: agentic.readiness_probe and dispatch.*, with dispatch tools all using a noun-style verb (estimate, evals, index, order, quote). No mixed conventions or irregular verbs; the naming fully supports discoverability.
Six tools is a well-scoped set for a field-service dispatch server. Each tool covers a distinct operational function without redundancy, and the count is neither too thin nor bloated for the declared scope.
The server covers pricing (estimate/quote), order creation, trade catalog, readiness probe, and performance metrics. A minor gap: there is no direct tool to fetch order status or manage/cancel orders, though a tracking URL is returned, which slightly limits lifecycle coverage.
