Skip to main content
Glama

vivid-ads-commerce

by au.com.vividads

vivid_delivery_estimate

Read-onlyIdempotent

Estimate WHEN an order would arrive at an Australian postcode — the question behind 'can I get it by Friday?'. Works the timeline through honestly: production starts only after the customer approves their digital proof (3pm AEST cutoff), then production time for that product, then transit for their postcode (metro/regional/remote bands). Returns an arrival WINDOW plus the assumptions it made. This is an ESTIMATE, never a guarantee — always relay the caveat, and for a hard deadline tell them to call 1300 721 614. Free pickup from Derrimut VIC is usually the fastest option.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
productNoproduct name — used to read its real production time
postcodeYes4-digit Australian delivery postcode
artwork_readyNotrue if artwork is print-ready and the proof will be approved immediately

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses the underlying timeline logic (proof approval cutoff, production time, transit bands) and states that the tool returns an arrival window plus assumptions, adding substantial behavioral context beyond the annotations' readOnly/idempotent hints. 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 front-loaded with purpose and each of its five sentences earns its place: establishing the question, explaining the timeline, detailing the output, stating the caveat, and offering a fastest alternative. It is concise relative to the complexity it covers.

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 moderate complexity, no output schema, and rich sibling set, the description is complete: it explains inputs, methodology, output format, risk caveat, and an alternative action. It leaves no major ambiguity for an agent selecting or invoking it.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptive parameter text, so baseline is 3. The description enriches this by explaining how each parameter factors into the estimate (e.g., artwork_ready affecting proof approval, postcode using transit bands, product production time), adding value beyond the schema.

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 and resource: "Estimate WHEN an order would arrive at an Australian postcode" and frames it as answering 'can I get it by Friday?'. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like vivid_delivery_quote (pricing) and vivid_fulfilment_order_status (tracking).

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 explicitly states when to use the tool (for delivery timing estimates) and when not to rely on it: 'for a hard deadline tell them to call 1300 721 614.' It also mentions an alternative option ('Free pickup from Derrimut VIC is usually the fastest option') and stresses to always relay the caveat that it's an estimate.

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

All vivid-ads-commerce toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools have overlapping purposes, particularly order status (vivid_order_status vs vivid_fulfilment_order_status vs vivid_fulfilment_production_stage) and artwork handling (vivid_artwork vs vivid_upload_artwork). An agent could easily select the wrong one without careful reading of the descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tools share the consistent 'vivid_' prefix and snake_case format. However, the second part mixes verb-noun patterns (place_order, check_artwork) with noun-based names (price, product, order_status), so the pattern isn't fully uniform but is still predictable and readable.

Tool Count3/5

At 25 tools, the server is at the heavy end of the borderline range. The broad scope (product discovery, pricing, ordering, artwork, fulfilment statuses, support) justifies most tools, but some overlapping status/artwork tools could be consolidated to reduce clutter.

Completeness4/5

The server covers the entire customer journey from product search, configuration, pricing, quoting, ordering, artwork upload/check, proof tracking, production/delivery status, to reordering. Minor gaps like explicit order update/cancel tools are missing, but support_answer covers those topics and the lifecycle is otherwise well-covered.

Resources