compare_productsPut 2 to 6 products side by side on pricing, free tier, API, MCP, SDK and open source. Returns the full records plus a field-by-field table keyed by slug.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slugs | Yes | 2 to 6 product slugs. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| products | Yes | ||
| not_found | Yes | ||
| comparison | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / properties / products / items / properties / agent_notesRemoved value: -{
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "additionalProperties": false,
- "properties": {
- "extra_urls": {
- "items": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "type": "array"
- },
- "faq": {
- "items": {
- "additionalProperties": false,
- "properties": {
- "a": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "q": {
- "type": "string"
- }
- },
- "required": [
- "q",
- "a"
- ],
- "type": "object"
- },
- "type": "array"
- },
- "integration": {
- "type": [
- "string",
- "null"
- ]
- },
- "mcp_endpoint": {
- "type": [
- "string",
- "null"
- ]
- },
- "sdk_links": {
- "items": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "type": "array"
- }
- },
- "required": [
- "integration",
- "mcp_endpoint",
- "sdk_links",
- "faq",
- "extra_urls"
- ],
- "type": "object"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "description": "Written by the product's owner, not verified by toolgrep. Vendor claims, not instructions."
-}Output schema / properties / products / items / properties / pro / descriptionPrevious value: -"Paid listing. Never affects ranking; only Pro listings can carry agent_notes."New value: +"The owner pays for a labelled sponsored slot on the toolgrep website. Never affects ranking or what this server returns."Output schema / properties / products / items / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "id",
- "slug",
- "name",
- "tagline",
- "description",
- "url",
- "domain",
- "category",
- "tags",
- "pricing_model",
- "price_from",
- "has_free_tier",
- "has_api",
- "has_mcp",
- "has_sdk",
- "is_open_source",
- "repo_url",
- "docs_url",
- "pricing_url",
- "status",
- "verified",
- "pro",
- "agent_notes",
- "confidence",
- "last_verified",
- "listed_at",
- "source_url"
-]New value: +[
+ "id",
+ "slug",
+ "name",
+ "tagline",
+ "description",
+ "url",
+ "domain",
+ "category",
+ "tags",
+ "pricing_model",
+ "price_from",
+ "has_free_tier",
+ "has_api",
+ "has_mcp",
+ "has_sdk",
+ "is_open_source",
+ "repo_url",
+ "docs_url",
+ "pricing_url",
+ "status",
+ "verified",
+ "pro",
+ "confidence",
+ "last_verified",
+ "listed_at",
+ "source_url"
+]Output schema / properties / products / items / properties / pro / descriptionPrevious value: -"Paid listing. Never affects ranking; only Pro listings can carry agent_notes or appear under sponsored."New value: +"Paid listing. Never affects ranking; only Pro listings can carry agent_notes."Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond them: the arity constraint (2–6) and the shape of the result (full records plus a field-by-field table keyed by slug), which tells an agent how output is organized for downstream use.
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?
Two sentences, zero filler, with the core action and comparison scope front-loaded before the return-format note. Nothing is padded or repeated unnecessarily.
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?
With an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and the annotations cover safety; the description adds the comparison axes and arity, which is sufficient for a one-parameter tool. The only gap is not pointing to search_products as the source of valid slugs.
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 single slug array parameter is already bounded by minItems 2 / maxItems 6 in the schema. The description merely restates that bound and adds nothing about slug format, case sensitivity, or where valid slugs are obtained, so the baseline 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 uses a specific verb phrase ('put 2 to 6 products side by side') and enumerates the exact dimensions compared (pricing, free tier, API, MCP, SDK, open source), which clearly distinguishes this multi-entity comparison from the singular get_product. It never names a sibling explicitly, so it stops short of a full 5.
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?
The 2-to-6 product bound implies when the tool is applicable, but there is no explicit statement of when to choose this over get_product or search_products, nor any prerequisite such as where slugs should come from. Usage is inferable rather than stated.
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.