Nutrition MCP

Prepare product links

prepare_retailer_handoff

Read-onlyIdempotent

Packages exact retailer products into links for the user to open.

The handoff repeats the products, links, and quantities with the original request. It does not contact the retailer, change a cart, or check out.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "retailer_id": "<retailer_id>",
      "original_request": "<original_request>",
      "items": "<items>"
    },
    "name": "prepare_retailer_handoff"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`items`	Yes	Exact products, 1-50, each with the retailer's product_id, a name, an absolute HTTPS product_url, and a positive quantity.
`store_id`	No	Retailer store or location id, if known.
`retailer_id`	Yes	Retailer id from list_retailers.
`original_request`	Yes	The shopping request the products were chosen for.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that by clarifying there are no external side effects (no retailer contact, no cart mutation, no checkout) and that the handoff echoes products, links, and quantities alongside the original request.

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?

Three short sentences with zero filler. The purpose is front-loaded and the negative-scope sentence follows immediately, so an agent gets the essentials in the first line.

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?

With an output schema present and full schema coverage, the description needn't explain return values, and annotations carry the safety profile; the description completes the picture by ruling out checkout and cart behavior. The only minor gap is that it doesn't mention failure conditions such as an invalid or non-HTTPS product_url.

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 retailer_id, original_request, items, and store_id are already documented, including the 1-50 item bound and required per-item fields. The description only loosely reinforces that items and original_request travel together; it adds no format or constraint detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a concrete verb and resource: packaging exact retailer products into links for the user to open. It is unambiguous about what the tool produces, though it doesn't name a sibling it is distinct from (list_retailers appears only in the schema, as an upstream source of retailer_id).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by 'for the user to open' and the explicit negatives ('does not contact the retailer, change a cart, or check out'), which tell an agent this is the terminal, non-transacting step. There is no explicit when-to-call trigger or named alternative, so the agent must infer the sequencing.

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

All Nutrition MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?