SuperCatch

List my store's native low-stock observations

supercatch_list_low_stock

Read-onlyIdempotent

List bounded native on-hand quantities at or below the actual saved low-stock threshold across undeleted product types and listing statuses. BOTH VIEW_ANALYTICS and MANAGE_SETTINGS are required. Stored ACTIVE reservations and available units are separate; each page is a consistent native snapshot with live continuation, not a store total. No notification, inventory, provider or monetary changes occur. Use supercatch_list_low_stock for this read in the connected account. Supply only the fields in its strict input schema. No prices, inventory, orders, automation, marketplace publication or provider configuration are changed. Returns a Shared MCP Baseline 1.0.0 envelope with explicit scope, provenance, unknown values, omissions and typed errors. Requires OAuth store:read consent. Requires store:read consent, a currently approved owned store and BOTH current VIEW_ANALYTICS and MANAGE_SETTINGS permissions. Native on-hand policy is preserved; stored reservations are separate, without provider, alert-delivery or monetary claims. Read-only and unmetered; no persistent plans or provider submissions. Invalid fields, unavailable stores and foreign or deleted targets fail without private records. Expired cursors require a fresh search. Provider failures are explicit errors.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "limit": 10
    },
    "name": "supercatch_list_low_stock"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Maximum native low-stock records per live page, one to 20.
`cursor`	No	Use only the prior next_cursor for the same account, grant, store, policy and page size.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description does add real context beyond that: snapshot-per-page semantics with live continuation, that stored reservations and available units are separate, cursor expiry requiring a fresh search, and the no-side-effect guarantee. However, it repeats the same no-changes claim several times without adding new information on return shape or scoping.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The opening sentence is well front-loaded, but the remainder is highly repetitive: the absence of inventory/price/order changes is asserted three separate times and the VIEW_ANALYTICS + MANAGE_SETTINGS requirement is stated twice. Significant trimming would preserve all the actual information.

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, the description needn't explain return values, and it does cover the things an agent needs: required permissions, the snapshot/continuation model, cursor invalidation, and failure modes (invalid fields, unavailable stores, provider failures). Only the lack of sibling routing keeps it from being fully complete.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents limit and cursor fully. The description adds only the notion of 'live continuation' between pages and mitigates the cursor-mismatch risk by implying it must match account, grant, store, policy and page size — a marginal addition over the schema's own cursor description.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The first sentence states a specific verb (list) and resource (native on-hand quantities at or below the saved low-stock threshold, across undeleted product types/listing statuses), which is concrete and distinguishable. It does not, however, explicitly contrast with nearby siblings such as get_listing_stock_aging or get_store_inventory, so the differentiation is implicit.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The only routing guidance is the circular 'Use supercatch_list_low_stock for this read in the connected account,' which adds nothing. There is no statement of when to prefer this over stock-aging or store-inventory reads, and no explicit when-not conditions; the permission and cursor prerequisites are context, not usage guidance.

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

All SuperCatch tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?