GOAT live listing count across the whole marketplace -- the true catalog size, which goat_search's total_results cannot report because it caps at 10000.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | The tool result payload (shape varies per tool; see each tool's docs resource). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
readOnlyHint and openWorldHint already declare the safety profile, so the bar is lower; the description still adds that the count is 'live' (freshness) and that it reflects the 'true catalog size' beyond a throttled search field. No return format or rate-limit detail, but the added context is genuine.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the primary purpose comes first and the sibling comparison follows as justification. Every clause earns its place.
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?
An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, annotations cover safety, and there are no parameters. The description supplies exactly the two things an agent needs: what is counted and how it differs from goat_search.
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?
Zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The description correctly implies a no-argument whole-marketplace scope.
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?
States a specific verb+resource ('live listing count across the whole marketplace') and immediately distinguishes it from the sibling goat_search by explaining the cap limitation. An agent knows exactly what number it gets and why it differs from a search.
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?
Explains the condition that selects this tool over goat_search's total_results (which caps at 10000), giving clear context for when to reach for it. It lacks an explicit when-not statement, but the routing rationale against the named alternative is strong.
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.
