GotCashback

Search stores by name

get_stores_by_name

Read-onlyIdempotent

Searches stores by name and returns the matching stores' identity only — store_id, name, country_code, website domain and GotCashback store page url — without cashback rates or gift cards. Use it when the user wants to know whether GotCashback covers a store, in which countries a store is listed, or when you need a store_id for the account tools (toggle_favorite_store, set_store_alert). For any question about cashback rates or gift card discounts call get_cashback_rates_by_store_name or get_gift_cards_by_store_name directly instead — they search by name themselves, so this tool is not a required first step. Returns matches best first; empty when nothing matched. When presenting stores, include each store's 'url' as a clickable link (and 'gift_cards_url' when present).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`store_name`	Yes	The retailer or brand name as a shopper would say it, e.g. 'Walmart', 'Nike', 'Best Buy', 'Expedia', 'Home Depot'. Matched as a case-insensitive substring of the store name and its known alternate names, best match first. Pass the plain name only — no words like 'cashback', 'gift card' or a country.
`country_code`	No	Optional. Lowercase ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code that limits results to one country, e.g. 'us' (United States), 'ca' (Canada), 'gb' (United Kingdom — use 'gb', not 'uk'), 'de' (Germany), 'au' (Australia), 'fr' (France). Pass it when the user names a country ('in Canada', 'UK cashback'); omit it to search all supported countries.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`stores`	No	Matching stores (one entry per country). Empty when nothing matched.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already establish readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description goes beyond that by disclosing that results are identity-only, sorted best match first, and empty when nothing matches. It also adds presentation guidance for the returned URLs. No contradiction with annotations exists.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Although long, the description is dense and well-ordered: scope, trigger conditions, exclusions, ordering, empty behavior, and presentation guidance each get exactly one sentence. Every sentence earns its place and the core output boundary is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present, complete parameter descriptions, and safety annotations, the description still covers use cases, alternatives, result ordering, empty behavior, and presentation instructions, so an agent has enough to select and invoke it correctly. The only minor wrinkle is mentioning 'gift_cards_url' after saying gift cards are excluded, which is slightly ambiguous even though it likely refers to a store page URL.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema already documents both parameters thoroughly at 100% coverage, including examples, lowercase country-code format, and the 'gb, not uk' guidance. The top-level description does not need to add parameter mechanics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a concrete verb and resource ('Searches stores by name') and then sharply bounds the result set to identity fields only, explicitly excluding cashback rates and gift cards. This makes it immediately distinguishable from siblings such as get_cashback_rates_by_store_name and get_gift_cards_by_store_name.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It lists concrete trigger conditions: checking store coverage, seeing which countries a store is listed in, or obtaining a store_id for account tools. It also tells the agent when not to use it by routing cashback and gift-card questions directly to the sibling tools and clarifies this tool is not a required first step.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All GotCashback tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target a clearly distinct resource and action, and the descriptions carefully cross-reference when to use each one. The main risk is the similar get_stores_by_name, get_cashback_rates_by_store_name, and get_gift_cards_by_store_name names, though their descriptions do a good job of separating identity, cashback rates, and gift cards.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming follows a mostly consistent get_<resource>_by_<selector> pattern with clear verb prefixes for mutations like set, remove, and toggle. Minor inconsistencies exist, such as get_portal_by_id (singular) versus get_portals_by_name (plural), and the get_my_* cluster for account tools.

Tool Count4/5

Eighteen tools is slightly above the ideal 3-15 range, but the count is justified by the breadth of the domain: store comparison, brand and category deals, gift cards, portals, countries, and user account features. Each tool has a distinct purpose, so the set does not feel genuinely bloated.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the main workflows well: finding cashback by store, brand, or category, comparing gift cards and portls, browsing countries and stores, and managing favorites, alrts, and profile. Minor gaps exist, such as no direct way to rank all stores in a country by cashback rate without per-store lookups, but agents can work around these.

Resources

Need Help?