Skip to main content
Glama

GroceryPulse Canada

by ca.grocerypulse
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Compare a Canadian grocery list

compare_grocery_list
Read-onlyIdempotent

Compares current public chain prices for a list of catalogue item ids (from get_grocery_catalog) and quantities in one supported Canadian city; plan_grocery_order is the form that takes a list in the shopper's own words. A lowest-chain recommendation requires fresh full requested coverage at two eligible chains with no close call or package/reference-size reversal. Results keep missing items, exclusions, price dates, scope and source links, and each chain includes plain per-item storeLinks to its own product page or search, with the price date used. Each id is one product at its catalogue size (for example 4 L milk); a different size, variant or brand is a different product. Chain medians are not branch stock or guaranteed checkout quotes. Read-only: it does not buy, save a list, send email or access licensed or private data.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityYes
itemsYesIDs must be unique. Each id is one product at one package size (its catalogue name and referenceSize); a different size, variant or brand is a different product (for example, the catalogue's 4 L milk is not 2 L milk).
storesNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / items / description
      Previous value: -"IDs must be unique; ask the shopper before substituting a canonical item for a different variant or branded product."New value: +"IDs must be unique. Each id is one product at one package size (its catalogue name and referenceSize); a different size, variant or brand is a different product (for example, the catalogue's 4 L milk is not 2 L milk)."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / city / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "vancouver",
-  "calgary",
-  "edmonton",
-  "saskatoon",
-  "winnipeg",
-  "toronto",
-  "ottawa",
-  "montreal",
-  "quebec-city",
-  "moncton",
-  "halifax",
-  "charlottetown",
-  "st-johns"
-]New value: +[
+  "vancouver",
+  "victoria",
+  "calgary",
+  "edmonton",
+  "saskatoon",
+  "regina",
+  "winnipeg",
+  "toronto",
+  "ottawa",
+  "montreal",
+  "quebec-city",
+  "moncton",
+  "fredericton",
+  "halifax",
+  "charlottetown",
+  "st-johns"
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/openWorldHint/destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds genuinely useful caveats beyond that (chain medians are not branch stock or guaranteed checkout quotes, price dates, source links). The closing read-only sentence partially restates the annotations, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and every sentence conveys a constraint or caveat, but the description is dense and the final read-only clause largely duplicates the annotation hints.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does explain what results retain (missing items, exclusions, price dates, scope, per-chain storeLinks), which is solid. Only minor gap is the unexplained stores filter.

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 only 33%, and the description compensates for the items parameter well (each id is one product at its catalogue size; a different size/variant/brand is a different product). However the 'stores' parameter is never mentioned in the description, leaving that filter entirely to the enum, so compensation is incomplete.

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?

States a specific verb (compares) and resource (current public chain prices for catalogue item ids in one Canadian city), and explicitly distinguishes itself from plan_grocery_order, which handles free-text lists.

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?

Names the sibling alternative and the condition selecting it, plus states the prerequisite that ids come from get_grocery_catalog and that a lowest-chain recommendation needs fresh full coverage at two eligible chains. An agent knows when this tool applies versus the others.

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

All GroceryPulse Canada toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources