Live search across 250,000+ verified UK and Canada retail deals. Read-only, no auth required.
Scored across 1 tool
With only a single tool in the set, there is no possibility of overlap or misselection between tools. An agent can unambiguously identify search_deals as the one available capability.
The lone tool follows a clear verb_noun snake_case convention (search_deals), which is readable and predictable. Consistency is trivially satisfied with one tool.
One tool is thin for a service spanning 20+ retailers and two countries, though a read-only deal search API can legitimately be search-only. It sits at the borderline rather than being an obvious mismatch.
Search is covered, but there is no companion operation to fetch a specific deal's details, list retailers, or browse categories, so agents hit dead ends when they need structured follow-up. The core lookup works, but the surface is notably narrow.
Search BuySignal's live UK/Canada deal database across 20+ retailers. Each deal may include price_label and new_label; definitions: https://buysignal.deals/how-we-track-prices.
BuySignal aggregates real-time price drops from major UK retailers (Currys, Argos, John Lewis, Very, JD Sports, Foot Locker, Boots, The Fragrance Shop, and more) and Canadian retailers (Best Buy Canada, Canada Computers, Sport Chek, and more).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | max number of results to return (default 20, max 50). | |
| query | No | optional text to match against the deal title (case-insensitive substring match). | |
| market | No | "uk" or "ca" (Canada). Defaults to "uk". | uk |
| category | No | "tech", "fashion", or "fragrance". Omit to search all categories in that market. | |
| max_price | No | only return deals at or below this sale price (GBP for uk, CAD for ca). | |
| min_discount | No | only return deals with at least this discount percentage off the original price. |
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds modest context (real-time aggregation, retailer coverage, price_label/new_label semantics), but omits rate limits, result freshness guarantees, or pagination behavior beyond what the schema's limit field states.
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?
Purpose is front-loaded in the opening clause and the second paragraph's retailer list is informative for an open-world search. It is somewhat list-heavy and the dangling 'definitions: <URL>' reference cannot be resolved by an agent in-band, but there is no wasted prose.
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?
An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is unnecessary, and the description covers markets, retailer sources, and label semantics. Nothing critical is missing for a zero-required-parameter read search, though freshness/ordering of results is left unstated.
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 description coverage is 100%, so every parameter (limit, query, market, category, max_price, min_discount) is already documented with defaults and formats. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, which is the correct baseline when the schema does the work.
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?
States a specific verb (search) and resource (BuySignal's live UK/Canada deal database), plus the scope of coverage (20+ retailers, two markets). With no sibling tools, nothing further is needed to identify what the tool does.
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?
Usage is implied rather than stated: the description makes clear it is for finding aggregated price drops, but never says when to use it versus something else, nor any exclusions or preconditions. The retailer/market enumeration is context, not guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
search_dealsVerified US consumer-tech deals, coupons and 90-day price history. Free, read-only, no API key.
Search 100+ US retailers, 260M+ products with real-time pricing, stock, and price history. Documentation - https://www.lemmebuyit.com/developer Homepage - https://www.lemmebuyit.com
Shopping search across 100M+ products, with every retailer's offer and live price in one place.
Curated, human-reviewed deal feed for AI agents — live deal search + price watches. No auth.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
