Get the full machine-readable manifest for one product by slug — type, version, author (verified?), license, price, dependencies, security-scan status, compatibility and install command — so you can evaluate it before installing.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | The product slug. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It clearly indicates a read-only 'get' operation and lists the returned data fields, but does not explicitly state the absence of side effects, permission requirements, or any potential rate limits. It provides a moderate level of transparency about what the tool does and returns, but lacks explicit safety/behavioral disclaimers.
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 a single, well-structured sentence that leads with the primary action and resource, then uses an em-dash to enumerate contents. No wasted words; every part adds value. It is front-loaded with the core purpose.
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?
Given the simple one-parameter schema and absence of an output schema, the description compensates well by listing the manifest's contents (type, version, license, etc.) and its intended use. It tells the agent what to expect without over-specifying. Minor gap: it does not specify the exact output format (e.g., JSON), but 'machine-readable manifest' is reasonably clear.
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 description coverage is 100% (slug has a description), so the baseline is 3. The description adds 'by slug' and that it targets one product, but does not elaborate further on the slug parameter beyond what the schema already states. It adds a slight contextual framing but does not significantly compensate beyond 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 clearly states the tool retrieves a full machine-readable manifest for one product by slug, listing specific fields (type, version, author, etc.). It distinguishes itself from siblings like install (which would install) and search (which searches) by focusing on inspection/evaluation.
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 explicitly says 'so you can evaluate it before installing', giving a clear use case. It implies it should be used for pre-install evaluation, though it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools. The guidance is sufficient for an agent to decide when to invoke it.
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.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but there is some overlap: search and search_components both find products (one whole marketplace, one UI components only), and get_component and inspect both retrieve product information (one for source, one for manifest). These are distinguishable by their descriptions and use cases.
The tools follow a mostly consistent verb-based pattern with snake_case (check_purchase, get_component, search_components), but three tools are single verbs without an object (inspect, install, purchase). This is a minor deviation from the verb_noun convention used by the others.
Seven tools is well-scoped for a marketplace server. Each tool covers a necessary step in the workflow (search, evaluate, purchase, install) without bloat, and there are no redundant utilities.
The tool set covers the full marketplace lifecycle: discovery (search, search_components), evaluation (inspect, get_component), acquisition (purchase, check_purchase), and installation (install). The flow from search to install is seamless, with no obvious dead ends or missing critical operations.