search_productsDurchsucht den Katalog des elevai-Demoshops nach einem Begriff und liefert Name, Preis, Waehrung und Produktseite. Ohne Begriff kommen die zuletzt aufgenommenen Produkte.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| query | No | Suchbegriff, etwa "Kite" oder "Abo". |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| count | Yes | ||
| products | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It reveals the search behavior and the fallback to latest products, but does not mention sort order, limit application, or any side effects. For a simple read-only search this is adequate but not comprehensive.
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?
Two short sentences are front-loaded with the main action and result fields, and the second sentence adds the useful no-query behavior without waste. Every clause earns its place.
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 low-complexity search tool with an output schema and two optional parameters, the description covers the key behavior and the empty-query case. It could be more complete by explaining the limit parameter's effect and how it differs from get_product, but nothing critical for a basic call is missing.
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 only 50%: query is described in the schema, and the description adds the important semantics that an empty query returns recent products. The limit parameter is not semantically explained in either place, though its numeric constraints and default are present in the schema.
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 states a specific verb ('Durchsucht'), a resource ('Katalog des elevai-Demoshops'), and the delivered fields (Name, Preis, Waehrung, Produktseite), making the core purpose clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling get_product, so it misses the top score.
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 when to search by term and explains the no-query fallback ('Ohne Begriff kommen die zuletzt aufgenommenen Produkte'), giving some usage context. However, it does not name alternatives such as get_product or state when not to use this tool, so usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.
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 targets a distinct resource or stage: products are searched and read, orders are created and checked, payment links are created, and login has separate start and status tools. The two status tools are clearly separated by domain, so an agent is unlikely to confuse them.
All tools use a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern such as create_order, get_order_status, search_products, and start_login. The action words are specific and the objects are clear, making the expected behavior predictable across the entire set.
Seven tools is well within the ideal range for a focused commerce demo. Each tool covers a necessary step in the demo workflow without redundant additions or unnecessary complexity.
The tool surface covers the full demo workflow: product discovery, order creation, payment-link generation, order status checks, and the external login flow. The demo's explicit constraints make the absence of admin operations such as update or delete acceptable, and there are no dead ends.