Skip to main content
Glama

Packrift MCP

by io.github.Packrift

Explain no exact match

explain_no_exact_match
Read-onlyIdempotent

Explain why a nearby product should not be presented as an exact match for the buyer's spec, then return safe next actions and a quote-request URL.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
familyNoOptional product family.
reasonNoOptional short explanation from the caller.
requested_specYesThe buyer's exact requested packaging spec.
missing_or_mismatched_fieldsNoRequired fields that were unavailable or different, such as length, material, color, or pack_count.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context about the response (explanation, safe next actions, quote-request URL), which goes beyond the structured annotations.

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 entire description is a single front-loaded sentence that clearly states the action, purpose, and expected outputs. Every phrase earns its place without unnecessary detail.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains the return value (safe next actions and a quote-request URL). The tool's purpose and input context are clear, though optional fields like 'reason' and 'family' are not elaborated in the description.

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%, with all four parameters documented. The description adds context about 'requested_spec' and 'missing_or_mismatched_fields' but does not meaningfully extend beyond the schema definitions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Explain why... should not be presented') and identifies a clear resource (nearby product vs. buyer's spec) and output (safe next actions and quote-request URL). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like compare_alternatives or find_packaging_for_item, which have different goals.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description implies the precise scenario (when a nearby product is not an exact match), giving clear context for use. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance, so it lacks full exclusion clarity.

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

All Packrift 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools have overlapping purposes: check_inventory and inventory_status both focus on live stock, find_packaging_for_item and pack_calculator both handle dimension-based fitting, and create_cart_url, prepare_purchase_handoff, and get_cart_handoff_candidates all revolve around cart handoff. While descriptions add some clarity, an agent could easily select the wrong tool without careful reading.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern (e.g., check_inventory, get_pricing, search_products), but inventory_status and pack_calculator are noun-based and break the convention. The naming is still predictable and readable overall.

Tool Count4/5

15 tools is at the upper edge of the ideal range, and the count feels slightly inflated due to overlapping inventory and cart-handoff tools. However, each tool has a defined purpose in the procurement workflow, so the count is not excessive.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full buyer journey: search, fit calculation, comparison, product detail, inventory check, pricing, cart creation, purchase handoff, shipping estimates, quotes, and reorder links. No critical dead ends were found.

Resources