Returns the full Teapplix MCP tool catalog grouped by category. Call this when you cannot find a tool or suspect the tools list was truncated. Use teapplix_get_ship_methods to get the live list of valid shipping method codes. [DEMO]
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| Topic | No | Optional topic. "shipping_methods" returns the full list of valid carrier method codes. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false. The description adds usage context (when tools list is truncated) and discloses the behavior of the 'shipping_methods' topic, though it doesn't describe response format or pagination. No contradiction.
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?
Three sentences, each serving a purpose: state function, give usage trigger, provide alternative. No wasteful text.
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?
The tool is straightforward with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description explains when to use it, what it returns, and distinguishes from a sibling tool. It doesn't enumerate all possible topics, but the parameter schema covers that. [DEMO] hint may reduce reliability confidence, but not a completeness gap.
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% with the Topic parameter described fully, including the shipping_methods example. The description does not add additional parameter details beyond what the schema already states, only restating the same example.
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 uses specific verb 'Returns' and identifies the resource 'full Teapplix MCP tool catalog grouped by category.' It distinguishes from siblings by naming teapplix_get_ship_methods as the live alternative.
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?
Explicitly states when to call: 'when you cannot find a tool or suspect the tools list was truncated.' Also names an alternative tool for a specific sub-case ('Use teapplix_get_ship_methods to get the live list of valid shipping method codes').
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.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes (orders, labels, rates, zones, profiles). A few name pairs like manage_tag vs manage_order_tags and set_order_ship_options vs update_order could be confused, but the descriptions explicitly clarify when to use each.
All tools share the teapplix_ prefix and follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., get_orders, create_order, purchase_label, validate_address). The only deviation is the bare 'help' tool, which is conventional and does not disrupt the pattern.
At 28 tools, the server is slightly over the ideal 3-15 range, but the breadth of shipping operations (orders, labels, rates, manifests, tracking, configuration) justifies the count. It is not bloated.
The tool surface covers the full order-to-shipping lifecycle: order create/update/retrieve, splitting/merging, label purchase and cancellation, rate quotes, tracking, manifesting, address validation, 3PL submission, and configuration (profiles, warehouses, queues, tags). No significant gaps are apparent.
