SiteCheck Shop & Social

Chemist Warehouse category products: product id, name

ecommerce_chemist_warehouse

Read-only

Chemist Warehouse (Australia) category products (first page, about 20): product id, name, price (AUD), saving off RRP (AUD), rating and review count, image and product link. Category as on the site, e.g. 81/vitamins-supplements, 1093/cold-flu, 109/foot-care. From chemistwarehouse.com.au via a rendering residential proxy. Price: $0.02 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

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": {
      "category": "<category>"
    },
    "name": "ecommerce_chemist_warehouse"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`category`	Yes	Category id and slug from chemistwarehouse.com.au/shop-online/<id>/<slug>, e.g. 81/vitamins-supplements

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/openWorld annotations, the description discloses the exact cost model ($0.02 USDC per successful call), the payment rails (x402 on Base, Solana or Arc), and that failed calls are not charged — critical pre-invocation information. It also reveals the retrieval mechanism (rendering residential proxy) and the ~20-item page cap, which tells the agent results are a truncated sample.

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?

Content is front-loaded: resource and return fields first, then category format, then source/mechanism, then pricing. Every sentence carries distinct information — no repetition of the title and no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a one-parameter, read-only listing tool with an output schema, this covers everything an agent needs: what it returns, the parameter format, the result cap, the data source, and the payment/cost implications of calling it.

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 the single `category` parameter is already fully documented with the same id/slug convention and example. The description reinforces the format with additional examples (1093/cold-flu, 109/foot-care) but adds no new syntax or edge-case meaning over the schema, so baseline 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 names a specific resource (Chemist Warehouse Australia category products) and scopes it precisely: first page, about 20 items, with the exact fields returned (id, name, AUD price, RRP saving, rating/review count, image, link). The retailer name implicitly separates it from the many other ecommerce_* siblings, but there is no explicit verb or statement of how it differs from, say, a search tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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 only implied: an agent can infer this is for browsing a category listing rather than searching by keyword, and the 'first page, about 20' note signals it is not a paginated exhaustive crawl. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no named alternative among siblings.

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

All SiteCheck Shop & Social 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?