Macy's own search-box suggestions (typeahead) for a partial query: a flat list of suggested search phrases, no product data. A partial query with no real matches returns a normal, empty result rather than an error.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes |
| 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?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: the response is a flat phrase list, carries no product data, and a no-match partial query returns a normal empty result rather than an error.
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?
Two sentences, zero waste, and the tool's identity and return shape are front-loaded before the edge-case note about empty results.
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 not be explained, yet the description still summarizes them. For a single-parameter read-only typeahead tool this is fully sufficient.
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?
Schema coverage is 0% and the single param has no inline description, so the description must carry the load. It does clarify that the query is a partial/prefix string (typeahead), which is meaningful beyond the bare 'query' field, though it gives no format or length detail.
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: 'Macy's own search-box suggestions (typeahead) for a partial query.' It also delimits the output ('a flat list of suggested search phrases, no product data'), which separates it from the macys_product sibling that returns actual product data.
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 phrase 'for a partial query' implies when the tool applies, and 'no product data' hints that a product tool is needed for real results. However, it names no alternative and gives no explicit when-to-use vs when-not guidance, leaving routing to inference.
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.
