nexbid_product
Read-onlyIdempotent
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| agent_id | No | Agent identifier for analytics-attribution. | |
| product_id | Yes | Product UUID | |
| session_id | No | Session token for multi-turn correlation. |
discovery
by dev.nexbid
TDQS
A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, establishing a safe, non-mutating operation. The description adds useful behavioral context by enumerating the returned information (price, availability, description, purchase link) and noting it is 'full product details.' No contradictions with annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is organized into short, purposeful sections (description, when_to_use, combination_hints, output_format). Every sentence adds value; there is no redundancy or filler.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness5/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read-only tool with one required parameter and three well-documented parameters, the description fully covers purpose, usage, output format, and workflow context. Even without an output schema, the output_format section lists the expected fields. Rich annotations and combination hints complete the picture.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5
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 all three parameters. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that product_id comes from a previous nexbid_search result, which clarifies the parameter's origin and intended use.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's action: 'Get detailed product information by ID from the Nexbid marketplace.' It specifies the resource (Nexbid product), scope (by ID), and explicitly distinguishes itself from browsing via nexbid_search and purchasing via nexbid_purchase.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines5/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Provides explicit when-to-use: 'When you have a specific product UUID from a previous nexbid_search result.' Also gives a clear exclusion: 'Do NOT use for browsing — use nexbid_search instead.' Addition of combination hints reinforces workflow (search → product → purchase).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools have distinct purposes, but there is some overlap between get_product and nexbid_product, which are explicitly described as aliases, and between list_products and nexbid_search with content_type='product'. This could cause confusion, though descriptions help clarify. Other tools like activate, pause, and cancel are well-differentiated for media buy lifecycle management.
Naming Consistency3/5
The naming is mixed with no consistent pattern. Some tools use verb_noun (e.g., create_media_buy, list_inventory), others use noun_verb (e.g., nexbid_search, nexbid_purchase), and some are single verbs (e.g., activate, pause, cancel). While readable, the lack of a uniform convention across the set reduces predictability.
Tool Count4/5
With 19 tools, the count is on the higher side but reasonable for the dual domains of media buying and marketplace discovery. It covers operations like listing, creating, managing, and reporting, which justifies the number. However, it borders on feeling heavy, especially with overlapping tools like get_product and nexbid_product.
Completeness5/5
The tool set provides comprehensive coverage for both media buying (create, submit, activate, pause, cancel, track, settle, report, compliance) and marketplace discovery (search, categories, product details, purchase, order status). There are no obvious gaps; workflows are well-supported with clear combination hints, ensuring agents can handle end-to-end tasks without dead ends.