List all public collections on Lowtoxgear with title, handle, URL, and product count. Examples: "Certified Activewear", "Clean Supplements", "GOTS Certified", "Low-Tox Home Products".
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | 1–100. Default 50. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'list all public collections' without mentioning read-only nature, pagination, authentication, or any side effects.
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 sentence followed by examples. It is front-loaded and efficient, though the examples are somewhat redundant with the 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?
For a simple list tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks details like ordering, full scope, or pagination behavior beyond the limit parameter.
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 schema fully describes the 'limit' parameter. The description adds no additional parameter information, so baseline score of 3 applies.
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 lists all public collections with specific fields and provides examples. It is a specific verb+resource, but lacks explicit differentiation from sibling tools.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like filter_by_certification or search_products. The description only states what it does.
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.