SiteCheck Shop & Social

CarParts.com product search: for a keyword up to 20

social_carparts_com

Read-only

CarParts.com product search: for a keyword (e.g. 'brake pads', 'headlight', a part number) up to 20 products per page with SKU, manufacturer number, brand, private-label flag, category path (top level, category, sub-category, part), price, list price and saving, shipping cost, universal-fit flag, product attributes (warranty, notes …), image and product link, plus the total result count and page count. Related tools on this server, for a different need: social_labx_com when you need listings of one LabX seller from the seller's public; social_x_com when you need one public X post by URL or ID from the JSON behind X's. Price: $0.002 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": {
      "q": "<q>"
    },
    "name": "social_carparts_com"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`q`	Yes	Search keyword or part number (2 to 80 characters)
`page`	No	Result page, 1 to 50 (default 1)
`limit`	No	Products from this page, 1 to 20 (default 20)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`q`	No
`page`	No
`pages`	No
`total`	No
`source`	No
`results`	No
`checkedAt`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses the commercial model in detail: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid via x402 on Base, Solana or Arc, with failed calls not charged. It also states the pagination shape (up to 20 products per page) and the full field set, which is exactly the operational context an agent needs before paying for a call.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose is front-loaded and nothing is buried, but the single run-on sentence carries a long field enumeration and a garbled alternatives clause ('from the seller's public', 'the JSON behind X's') that reads as truncated text. The returned-field list is also largely redundant given an output schema exists.

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?

For a three-parameter paid search tool, the definition covers query intent, pagination expectations, cost and payment mechanics, and failure charging, all with an output schema available for return shape. The only real gap is that the 'related tools' routing points to loosely related social tools rather than the closest ecommerce alternatives.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns a notch above by giving concrete keyword examples ('brake pads', 'headlight', a part number) that help formulate the required q value, and by restating the 20-per-page ceiling tied to the limit parameter. It adds nothing for the page parameter, whose 1-50 range lives only in the schema.

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 opening clause states a specific verb and resource ('CarParts.com product search') plus scope ('for a keyword ... up to 20 products per page') and enumerates the returned fields, so an agent immediately knows what it gets. It also names two other tools explicitly as being for different needs, distinguishing itself from siblings.

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?

It gives clear context for use (keyword searches such as 'brake pads', 'headlight', or a part number) and explicitly routes two named alternatives elsewhere. However, the named alternatives (social_labx_com, social_x_com) are barely relevant to a car-parts search, and there is no guidance on when NOT to use this tool or which of the many ecommerce_* siblings to prefer.

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?