caddence

Search golf products

search_golf_products

Search Caddence's UK golf equipment price-comparison catalogue (clubs, balls, bags, shoes, accessories across all major UK golf retailers; prices in GBP, refreshed daily). Returns best current prices with retailer counts. When in_stock is false, price is the last seen price, not a live offer. For retailer offers and purchase links, follow up with get_product_offers using the returned slug. If unsure of valid brand or product_type values, call get_catalog_stats first.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`brand`	No	Exact brand filter, e.g. "Titleist"
`limit`	No
`query`	No	Free-text search, e.g. "taylormade qi10 driver"
`offset`	No
`context`	Yes	Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."
`on_sale`	No	Only products currently below RRP
`sort_by`	No
`condition`	No
`max_price`	No	Maximum price in GBP
`min_price`	No	Minimum price in GBP
`product_type`	No	Exact type filter, e.g. "driver", "iron_set", "putter", "balls"

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and handles it well: it discloses daily price refresh, GBP currency, and a key caveat ('When in_stock is false, price is the last seen price, not a live offer'). It does not cover all output detail, but adds essential behavioral context.

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 four concise sentences, each adding distinct value: scope, returns, caveat, and follow-up instructions. No filler or redundant wording, and key information is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given 11 parameters and no output schema, the description gives a solid overview, mentions the returned slug, and highlights the availability caveat. However, it lacks explicit pagination behavior (offset/limit) and a fuller picture of result fields beyond 'best current prices with retailer counts', so some gaps remain.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 64%, leaving several parameters undocumented (limit, offset, sort_by, condition). The description adds context about GBP and the in_stock/last-seen-price behavior, but does not clarify the undocumented parameters or their interplay. It points to get_catalog_stats for valid values, which partially compensates.

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 it searches Caddence's UK golf equipment price-comparison catalogue, listing product categories and scope. It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly noting follow-up with get_product_offers and get_catalog_stats, making the tool's unique role unambiguous.

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 usage guidance: 'For retailer offers and purchase links, follow up with get_product_offers using the returned slug' and 'If unsure of valid brand or product_type values, call get_catalog_stats first.' This directly instructs when to use alternatives, going beyond generic context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All caddence tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: catalog stats for validation, deal intelligence for price quality, market deals for best values, price history for trends, product offers for purchase links, and search for initial product discovery. No overlap or ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent 'get_' prefix except 'search_golf_products', which uses 'search_'—this is appropriate as it's a broader discovery action while the rest retrieve specific data. The pattern is predictable and logically distinct.

Tool Count5/5

6 tools is perfectly scoped for a golf price comparison server: entry search, catalog metadata, deal finder, price quality, history, and offers. Each tool addresses a distinct task without redundancy.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full search-to-purchase workflow: product discovery (search_golf_products), catalog validation (get_catalog_stats), deal exploration (get_market_deals, get_deal_intelligence), historical context (get_price_history), and purchase links (get_product_offers). No obvious gaps.

Resources

Need Help?