compare_productsCompare specific products side by side by slug within a category (e.g. ['apple-iphone-16-pro','samsung-galaxy-s25-ultra'] in 'smartphones'). Returns full provenanced spec records plus a notFound list and the category's comparable specKeys, so an agent can line up the same attributes across products.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slugs | Yes | ||
| category | Yes | Product category slug from list_product_categories. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. Description adds that output includes 'full provenanced spec records', 'notFound list', and 'comparable specKeys', enriching behavioral understanding beyond 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?
Two sentences packed with information. No wasted words, front-loaded with purpose and example. 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?
Without an output schema, description details return values (provenanced spec records, notFound, specKeys). Covers tool behavior and output comprehensively for a 2-parameter comparison tool. No gaps.
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 50% (only 'category' described). Description explains 'slugs' as product slugs in a category with an example, and the output structure helps clarify parameter usage. Compensates well for missing schema descriptions.
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?
Description states specific verb 'compare' and resource 'products by slug within a category', with an example (e.g., ['apple-iphone-16-pro','samsung-galaxy-s25-ultra'] in 'smartphones'). Clearly differentiates from siblings like find_products or search_products.
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?
Implicitly provides when to use: when comparing specific products via slugs. The example and sibling context suggest when not to use (e.g., find_products for searching). No explicit exclusions but clear context.
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.
Tools have distinct purposes, but some overlap exists between 'compare' and 'compare_products' (both do side-by-side comparisons, one for vendors, one for products). However, descriptions clarify the domain difference, and most tools have clear boundaries.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., list_sections, search_vendors, get_benchmark). No mixed conventions or vague verbs.
19 tools is slightly on the higher side but appropriate for a comprehensive pricing index covering 271 themes. Each tool has a clear role, and the count does not feel bloated.
The tool surface covers listing, searching, comparing, finding, detailed info retrieval, and price change tracking. No obvious gaps for the domain of pricing and comparison.