Skip to main content
Glama

marketbasketanalysis-mcp

by io.github.48x-ai

explain_opportunity

Explain ONE mined opportunity: return its support, confidence, lift, and order sample count plus a short plain-language narrative of why the pair is a good cross-sell. Use this when a merchant asks 'why is this a good cross-sell?', 'explain this opportunity', or 'why should I bundle these?' after seeing it in get_opportunities. Different from get_opportunities: that lists the ranked set, this drills into a single opportunity_id with the stats spelled out in a sentence. Different from get_rationale: rationale is a generic pair 'why', this is the specific mined opportunity's own numbers. BigCommerce only today.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
opportunity_idYesThe id of the opportunity to explain, from get_opportunities.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly discloses the return content (statistics plus plain-language narrative) and scopes the tool to BigCommerce today. It does not explicitly state read-only behavior, but 'explain' and the return description imply no mutation.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and output, then gives usage triggers and sibling differentiations. Every sentence earns its place; the comparison sentences are compact and high-value rather than redundant.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description enumerates the return fields and narrative style, so an agent knows what to expect. It covers the single parameter, the intended usage context, platform scope, and relationships to sibling tools, making the description complete for this low-complexity tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents opportunity_id and its source. The description reinforces that the id comes from get_opportunities and refers to a single opportunity, but it adds little meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb ('Explain'), a specific resource ('ONE mined opportunity'), and the concrete outputs (support, confidence, lift, order sample count, narrative). It explicitly differentiates itself from get_opportunities and get_rationale, so an agent can distinguish it from siblings without inspecting schemas.

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?

The description gives explicit trigger phrases ('why is this a good cross-sell?', 'explain this opportunity', 'why should I bundle these?') and the context of use ('after seeing it in get_opportunities'). It also names the alternatives it is not, making the when-to-use decision unambiguous.

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

All marketbasketanalysis-mcp toolsInspect
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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools map largely one-to-one to distinct actions, and descriptions explicitly differentiate similar-looking pairs like get_recommendations vs. get_bundle_for_cart vs. find_substitutes. However, score_cross_sell vs. analyze_basket and get_rationale vs. explain_opportunity could still confuse an agent, since both score/explain overlapping concepts. Overall ambiguity is low but not zero.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern: get_* for retrieval, explain_* for drill-downs, score_* for validations, and action verbs for state changes. No camelCase or mixed conventions are present, making the naming highly predictable.

Tool Count3/5

19 tools is on the heavy side for a single server and exceeds the typical 3–15 range, even though most tools have distinct purposes. The large count reflects a broad feature set covering recommendations, alerts, forecasting, reorder, returns, and weekly planning, but a few tools could be consolidated. It feels slightly bloated rather than egregiously so.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers the main discovery–evaluation–action workflow: recommend, score, explain, triage, plan, and forecast. Minor gaps exist—there is no direct tool for creating or editing a bundle outside of weekly-plan actions, and no catalog-browsing capability—but those are largely external concerns. The workflow is coherent with no major dead ends.

Resources