[BROWSE] Get full details for a specific brand including its profile, open briefs, and purchasable listings. Provide a brand_slug from list_brands.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| brand_slug | Yes | Brand slug (e.g. "rrg", "my-brand") |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It does not disclose whether this is a read-only operation, potential errors (e.g., invalid slug), authentication requirements, or how the returned data is structured. The [BROWSE] hint is not an explicit behavioral guarantee.
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, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and the required parameter. It is front-loaded with actionable information and contains no fluff.
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?
While the tool has only one parameter and is a simple lookup, the description does not cover error handling, authentication, or output shape. It lists the main content areas, which is helpful, but given no output schema or annotations, a more complete description would note potential failure modes and prerequisites.
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?
The schema already provides a clear description and example for brand_slug. The description adds value by explaining that the slug should come from list_brands, offering guidance on how to find a valid value. The high schema coverage means the parameter is well understood without further detail.
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 it retrieves full details for a specific brand, listing the included categories (profile, open briefs, purchasable listings). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_brands, which presumably lists brands rather than details for one.
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?
It provides context for usage by instructing to supply a brand_slug from list_brands, implying a prerequisite step. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives or mention any exclusions.
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.
Several tool pairs could be confused, such as get_offers vs get_redemption_offers, get_world_eggs vs discover_egg, and the human vs agent purchase flows (initiate_purchase/confirm_purchase vs initiate_agent_purchase/confirm_agent_purchase). The descriptions are detailed and mostly disambiguating, but the presence of a retired tool (create_concierge) and multiple similarly named status/check tools add ambiguity.
The vast majority of tools follow a snake_case verb_noun pattern (list_drops, submit_design, redeem_points, verify_world_id). Minor deviations include 'priscilla_post' (proper noun prefix) and the interchangeable use of get/check/verify for status-like tools, but the overall convention is consistent and readable.
With 44 tools, the server is well above the 25-tool threshold that makes a surface feel heavy. Even though the platform covers many domains (commerce, affiliate, design, quests, concierge, marketing), this many tools strains discoverability and agent decision-making.
The buyer and designer flows are well covered (search → detail → purchase → download; brief → submit → status), but the brand side is incomplete. register_brand promises the ability to create briefs and product listings, yet no tools exist to create briefs or products, and there are no update/delete/refund operations for any resource, leaving registered brands at a dead end.