Get the featured offers, offer counts, and similar stores on one RetailMeNot category page, by a slug from retailmenot_categories. Use page for later offer pages (total_pages in the result).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| slug | 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. The description adds what the response contains (featured offers, counts, similar stores) and discloses pagination behavior via total_pages, which is useful beyond the annotations. It doesn't mention auth or rate limits, but the read-only profile is well covered.
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 tightly written sentences with zero filler, front-loading what is returned before the pagination detail. Every clause carries actionable information.
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-value details need not be enumerated, yet the description still summarizes the payload and covers both input parameters. Only minor gaps remain (no default for page, no explicit sibling routing), making it near-complete for this tool's complexity.
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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry meaning; it does explain slug provenance (from retailmenot_categories) and the page parameter's purpose tied to total_pages. It doesn't state the page base index or default, which is a minor gap.
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?
Names a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('RetailMeNot category page') plus the exact payload (featured offers, offer counts, similar stores). It also identifies the sibling that supplies the slug, distinguishing it from retailmenot_categories and other retailmenot_* tools.
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?
States where to get the slug (retailmenot_categories) and how to use 'page' for subsequent offer pages, referencing total_pages in the result. Clear usage context, though it doesn't explicitly say when to prefer this over alternatives like retailmenot_store.
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.
