Get commodity prices for agricultural products — produce, meat, dairy, grains. Source: USDA AMS Market News (100 years of free data) + BLS retail prices.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| weeks | No | Number of recent data points | |
| market | No | all | |
| category | No | all | |
| commodity | No | Commodity name: lettuce, ground_beef, whole_milk, eggs, wheat, corn, etc. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description mentions data sources but does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, data freshness, pagination, or rate limits. The annotation 'readOnlyHint' is not present, so the description should explicitly indicate the tool's non-destructive behavior.
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?
The description is extremely concise, consisting of two sentences that clearly state the tool's purpose and data source. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.
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 description does not explain return values or output format, and it omits details about how parameters like weeks or market affect results. Given no output schema, the description should provide more context on expected data shape.
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?
The input schema covers 50% of parameters with descriptions (weeks and commodity). The tool description lists categories matching the category enum but adds no additional meaning for market or other parameters. A description that elaborates on market and category options would improve this score.
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 clearly states the tool retrieves commodity prices for agricultural products and lists specific categories. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like 'food_retail_prices' or 'food_price_compare', leaving ambiguity about when to use this tool.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks any mention of appropriate use cases or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.