Moncler's own search-box suggestions (typeahead) for a partial query: completed/corrected search terms, suggested full phrases, and matching categories. Not product data.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| q | Yes | Partial search text, e.g. 'jack'. |
| 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 and external-data reach are covered. The description adds the result taxonomy and the negative scope ('not product data'), but says nothing about ordering, limits, or whether suggestions are localized, so it adds only modest value beyond the 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?
Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the resource and output kinds, and the discriminating negative constraint is placed last. No filler.
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?
With an output schema present, return values need not be spelled out, and the description covers purpose, scope, and exclusions for a one-parameter read-only tool. Minor omissions (result limits, ordering) do not block correct invocation.
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 100% and the single param 'q' is documented as partial search text with an example. The description reinforces 'partial query' but adds no format, length, or encoding detail beyond the schema, matching the baseline for fully documented parameters.
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 resource (Moncler search-box typeahead suggestions) and the exact output kinds (completed/corrected terms, full phrases, categories). The closing 'Not product data' explicitly separates it from sibling moncler_product/moncler_search, so an agent can route without opening a schema.
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?
Implies the use case clearly (feeding a partial query to get completions before a real search) and rules out product lookups. It stops short of naming the tool to use instead of this one (e.g., moncler_search) for actual products, so it is context rather than an explicit when/when-not rule.
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.
