Search the Matchbox catalog (over 104,000 active products) by name or keyword. Use this for direct lookups ('is X listed?'); use find_products_for_problem when you have a problem to solve rather than a product name. Each result is a Matchbox listing — keep its askmatchbox.com link as the source.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Product name or keyword. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -{
- "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
- "additionalProperties": false,
- "properties": {
- "results": {
- "items": {
- "additionalProperties": false,
- "properties": {
- "id": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "summary": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "title": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "url": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "website": {
- "type": "string"
- }
- },
- "required": [
- "id",
- "title",
- "url"
- ],
- "type": "object"
- },
- "type": "array"
- },
- "source_name": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "source_url": {
- "type": "string"
- }
- },
- "required": [
- "results",
- "source_name",
- "source_url"
- ],
- "type": "object"
-}New value: +nullOutput schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "results": {
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "id": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "summary": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "title": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "url": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "website": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "id",
+ "title",
+ "url"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "source_name": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "source_url": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "results",
+ "source_name",
+ "source_url"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds value by revealing that results are Matchbox listings and instructing the agent to keep the askmatchbox.com link as the source—practical behavioral context beyond the annotations.
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?
Three sentences, each earning its place: action and scope, usage routing, and result semantics with a source instruction. It is front-loaded and free of filler or repetition.
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 single-parameter read-only search tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool does, when to use it, and what results look like (Matchbox listings with source links). Annotations handle the safety profile, and no critical guidance is missing for correct 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% and the description's 'by name or keyword' matches the schema's 'Product name or keyword.' It reinforces the intended usage but adds no new constraints or format details beyond what the parameter description already provides; baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Search the Matchbox catalog... by name or keyword.' It scopes the tool precisely (over 104,000 active products) and differentiates it from find_products_for_problem by framing it for direct lookups like 'is X listed?'
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?
Explicit when-to-use guidance is provided: 'Use this for direct lookups'; it also names the alternative and the condition for choosing it ('use find_products_for_problem when you have a problem to solve rather than a product name'). No ambiguity remains about which tool to pick.
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.