get_100_best
The 100 Best Promotional Products in Australia - Sense2 quarterly flagship edit, 10 sections x 10 products with editorial intros
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Sense2 Promotional Products
TDQS
A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It does not disclose read-only nature, permissions, rate limits, or side effects. The description only states content structure, not behavioral traits.
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?
Single sentence of 22 words, efficiently conveying purpose and structure. No wasted words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Description explains what is returned (curated list, quarterly, structured) but lacks return format, authentication needs, or comparison to sibling tools. Adequate for a simple no-param tool but incomplete given no output schema or annotations.
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?
No parameters exist, so baseline is 4. Description adds no parameter info, but none is needed. Schema coverage is 100% trivially.
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?
Description clearly states the tool returns 'The 100 Best Promotional Products in Australia' with structure (10 sections x 10 products, editorial intros). It distinguishes from siblings like get_product (single product) and search_products (search results) by specifying a curated quarterly flagship edit.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_100_best_intel, search_products). The description provides no context for appropriate use or exclusions.
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
A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a distinct resource or action, from product and brand lookups to editorial collections and regional delivery info. Even similar listing tools (categories, industries, aesthetics, intents, inspirations, on-trend) are differentiated by their specific names and descriptions.
Naming Consistency4/5
The naming pattern is strongly consistent: lowercase with underscores, and almost all tools use the get_ prefix plus a resource name. The only deviation is search_products, which uses 'search' instead of 'get', but it still follows the verb_noun structure.
Tool Count3/5
With 21 tools, the server is on the heavy end of the typical range. The breadth is justified by the many distinct content types (products, brands, editorials, company info, reviews, regions, FAQ), but the count feels slightly bloated compared to leaner MCP servers.
Completeness4/5
The tool surface covers the full research and selection journey: product search, details, quotes, FAQ, company credibility, delivery areas, and inspirational content. The main gap is the lack of any transactional or order-placement tool, but that appears outside the intended scope.