Free-text search across the full catalogue — use for open queries like 'blockout for bedroom' or 'wood venetian'. Returns id, name, category, description, and product_url. For filtering by category, colour, or dimensions use lookup_catalog instead. Pass the returned id to get_product or get_price.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | No | Free-text query, e.g. 'blockout' or 'venetian' |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It states the output fields and the 'full catalogue' scope, implying a read-only search operation. It does not mention any side effects, pagination, or errors, but for a search tool this is adequate 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?
The description is three sentences: what, what it returns, and when to use alternatives/next steps. Every sentence contributes meaningful guidance with no fluff.
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?
For a single-parameter search tool with no output schema or annotations, the description gives the essential context: purpose, usage examples, return fields, alternative tools, and downstream integration. This is sufficient for correct tool selection and invocation.
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?
The schema covers the query parameter 100%, and the description adds value by giving richer usage examples ('blockout for bedroom', 'wood venetian') and explaining how the query fits into the larger workflow. This goes beyond the schema's minimal description.
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?
The description clearly states a specific action ('Free-text search') on a specific resource ('the full catalogue'), and differentiates from siblings by noting the alternative for filtering. The returned fields are listed, making the tool's purpose unmistakable.
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?
It explicitly tells when to use this tool ('open queries') with concrete examples, and when not to ('For filtering by category, colour, or dimensions use lookup_catalog instead'). It also instructs how to chain the result to downstream tools.
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.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but search_products and lookup_catalog overlap significantly in filtering by category and dimensions, which could confuse an agent. The three search/filter tools have subtle differences described, but the overlap lowers the score from perfect.
All tools use consistent snake_case with verb-noun structure (e.g., cancel_cart, get_product, update_checkout). There is no mixing of conventions, and the verbs clearly indicate the action, making the set predictable and easy to parse.
26 tools is slightly above the typical well-scoped range of 3-15, but the domain of an e-commerce blinds shop with additional services like AR, swatches, and price matches justifies the count. A couple of legacy tools (create_order, submit_enquiry) add minor bloat.
The core purchase flow (search, configure, cart, checkout, payment, order tracking) is fully covered. Additional services like AR visualization, swatches, price match, and WhatsApp handoff are present. Missing features like order listing or coupon application are minor gaps.