get_distribution_infoGet how to buy Renew products: the B2B distribution model (available exclusively through dental professionals, not in retail stores), the countries served, professional free-sample availability, and the where-to-buy / distributors / free-sample entry points with canonical URLs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| locale | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds context beyond readOnlyHint annotation by detailing the specific types of information returned (distribution model, countries, free samples, entry points). No contradictions with annotations.
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 a single sentence that front-loads the main purpose and lists components, but it is somewhat long and could be split for clarity.
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?
Given one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides a reasonable overview of return content, though it lacks detail on exact data structure or potential additional fields.
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 locale parameter is an enum with no description in the schema. The description mentions 'countries served' but does not clarify how locale affects output (e.g., language vs. country filtering), leaving ambiguity.
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 the tool retrieves distribution information for Renew products, including specific aspects like B2B model, countries, free samples, and entry points. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_company_info and get_product.
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?
The description implies usage for obtaining distribution details but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_company_info or when it would be inappropriate.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct aspect: company info, distribution info, product details, and product listing. No overlapping purposes, so an agent can clearly differentiate them.
All tool names follow the verb_noun pattern using snake_case (get_company_info, get_distribution_info, get_product, list_products). Consistent and predictable naming.
Four tools is appropriate for a focused server providing public information about a dental supply company and its products. The count is slightly low but well-scoped for the purpose.
The tool set covers the core public-facing aspects: company info, distribution, product listing and details. Missing search or filtering capabilities, but for a simple catalog, it's reasonably complete.