product
V1 Product
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | No | ||
| maxTimeout | No |
V1 Product
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | No | ||
| maxTimeout | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, and the description provides zero behavioral information. An agent cannot know whether this is a read or write operation, what side effects exist, or what the tool returns.
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 short but is under-specified rather than concise. It contains no substantive information that would help an agent select or invoke the tool.
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?
With no output schema, no annotations, two undocumented parameters, and a near-empty description, the definition is completely inadequate for correct tool 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?
Schema description coverage is 0% for the two parameters, url and maxTimeout. The description does not explain what url represents, how maxTimeout behaves, or how they relate to the tool's purpose.
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 is 'V1 Product', which is a version label, not a statement of function. It contains no verb or resource and does not help an agent distinguish this tool from sibling price_track. This is a tautology of the tool name.
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?
There is no guidance about when to use this tool or when to prefer price_track instead. No context, prerequisites, or exclusions are provided.
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.