The full catalogue as JSON: every product with its per-tier prices in GBP, deliverables, input contract, and status, plus store info, the five rigour tiers, and the citation-refund guarantee. Same data as https://agentfulfyl.com/catalog.json.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Describes output format and data included, but no annotations provided. Does not explicitly state read-only or side-effect free, though implied by 'get' context.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with main purpose, no filler.
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?
Covers output format and contents adequately for a simple retrieval tool. Lacks detail on response structure but acceptable without output schema.
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?
Schema has zero parameters, so baseline 4 is appropriate. Description adds no parameter info, but not needed.
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?
Clearly states it retrieves the full catalogue as JSON, listing contents explicitly. Distinguishes from sibling tools get_product (likely single product) and submit_demand (submission).
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?
Implies use when full catalogue is needed; no explicit when-not-to-use or alternative naming, but sibling names provide context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct purpose: full catalog retrieval, single product details, and user feedback submission. No overlap or ambiguity.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case (get_catalog, get_product, submit_demand), making the naming predictable and clear.
With only 3 tools, the server is on the low end of reasonable scope. While it covers basic read and feedback operations, it feels thin for a fulfillment server.
The server lacks essential operations for a fulfillment domain, such as order placement, order management, or product administration. The tool surface has significant gaps.