Search the Filtrous catalog by free text and/or spec terms (e.g. '0.22 micron PES syringe filter'). Returns matching products with title, handle, SKU, product_type, tags, price, and availability. Open tool — no API key required.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max results (default 10). | |
| query | Yes | Free-text and/or spec search. Field filters like 'product_type:...' or 'tag:...' are also honored. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions return fields and openness, but lacks details on pagination, sorting, or potential side effects. Adequate but not thorough.
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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and example. No wasted words. Efficient and clear.
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?
No output schema, but description lists return fields. No mention of sorting or pagination details beyond limit. For a search tool, this is largely complete given lack of annotations.
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 covers both parameters with descriptions. Description adds extra context: field filters (product_type:, tag:) are honored, which adds meaning beyond schema. Good.
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 searches the Filtrous catalog by free text or spec terms, with an example. It lists returned fields and distinguishes siblings (get_price_and_lead_time, get_product_details, request_quote) by being the search entry point.
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?
Explicitly states 'Open tool — no API key required,' indicating easy access. Does not explicitly say when not to use it, but the sibling tool names imply alternatives for price/details/quotes. Context is clear enough.
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 serves a distinct purpose: search vs details vs price/lead time vs quote request. No overlap in functionality.
All names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with underscores. Clear and predictable: search_products, get_product_details, get_price_and_lead_time, request_quote.
Four tools is well-scoped for a catalog server covering discovery, details, pricing, and quoting. No excess or deficiency.
Covers the full product inquiry and quoting workflow. Minor gap: no tool to list products without a search query, but search is robust enough to handle browsing.