Screen a vendor, store, or group-buy for legitimacy: reputation, red flags, Reddit sentiment.
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap. The tool's purpose is unambiguous and clearly scoped to vendor legitimacy screening.
The single tool name 'vendor_legit_check' follows a clear verb_noun pattern and is descriptive. Consistency is trivial with one tool, but the naming is exemplary.
While the server has only one tool, its narrow purpose—screening vendors for legitimacy—is well-served by a single comprehensive tool. The count is slightly under the typical 3-15 range but reasonable for the domain.
The tool covers the full scope of the domain: it accepts a name or URL, returns a reputation read, red-flag checklist, and community sentiment. No obvious gaps exist for the stated purpose.
Screen a vendor, store, or group-buy (by name or URL) for legitimacy before paying. Returns a reputation read, a red-flag checklist (e.g. no MOQ disclosed, brand-new vendor), and Reddit community sentiment. Use this to assess scam/non-delivery risk for a hobby/collectibles purchase or group buy.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Vendor, store, or group-buy name or URL, e.g. 'novelkeys' or a Kickstarter link. | |
| No | Include live Reddit sentiment (default true). Set false for a faster, lighter check. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It states what is returned but does not explicitly mention that the tool is read-only or any side effects. The implied usage suggests it is safe, but transparency could be improved.
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 concise with two sentences. The first covers action and output, the second provides usage context. No unnecessary words.
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 no output schema or annotations, the description adequately covers the return value and usage scenario. It lacks details on error conditions or limitations, but it is sufficient for a simple tool.
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 adds value by providing examples for 'query' ('e.g. 'novelkeys' or a Kickstarter link') and explaining the 'reddit' parameter's effect ('Includes live Reddit sentiment (default true). Set false for a faster, lighter check.').
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 verb 'Screen' and the resource 'vendor, store, or group-buy', specifying the action and target. It also lists the outputs (reputation read, red-flag checklist, Reddit sentiment), providing a clear purpose.
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 tells when to use the tool: 'Use this to assess scam/non-delivery risk for a hobby/collectibles purchase or group buy.' This provides clear context, though no alternative tools exist to differentiate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
vendor_legit_checkPre-purchase trust checks for AI agents: recalls, scam signals, proceed/caution/avoid verdict.
Check WooCommerce checkout-change risk using public evidence and privacy-safe store signals.
Verified deals, store policies & a trust score for thousands of online retailers. No auth.
Check a product's recall risk: score + active CPSC/FDA/NHTSA recalls for a product or brand.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
