Skip to main content
Glama
ApparelHub-AI

apparelhub-mcp

Official
by ApparelHub-AI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

listing_changes

Read-only

Track product-listing edits and their verdicts on the one metric each change should move, so you can tell if the last fix landed.

Instructions

What has been changed on your listings, and whether it worked. The other half of channel_performance: that says what to fix, this says whether the last fix landed.

Every shopper-visible change — title, description, images, price, search terms, variants, availability — is recorded automatically when it is made, along with the signal state that prompted it. Once the channel has finalised enough days either side, a verdict is computed on the ONE metric that change should have moved (a title is judged on click-through, not revenue).

⛔ unmeasurable IS THE DEFAULT VERDICT, NOT AN ERROR, and it does not mean the change had no effect. It means the data cannot support a conclusion — most often because the shop is not getting enough views for any single edit to register, in which case the answer is distribution and not more editing. Read verdict_reason before saying anything about a change: no_shop_traffic, window_not_final, metric_not_reported, no_baseline.

confounded means two changes landed close enough together that neither owns the result. Do not attribute it to whichever was most recent.

Read-only. Verdicts settle when read, so a window that closed since you last looked is already answered.

[#a02f68]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoHow far back to look. Default 90.
kindNoLimit to one kind of change, e.g. "title" or "price".
storeNoLimit to one store uuid.
productNoLimit to one product uuid — that listing's change history.
verdictNoLimit to one verdict, e.g. "improved" or "worsened".
workspaceNoWorkspace uuid to scope to.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.15.2

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint/openWorldHint; the description adds substantial context beyond them — verdicts are auto-computed per kind on the single metric the change should move, `unmeasurable` is the default rather than an error, `confounded` means overlapping changes, and verdicts settle at read time. These are non-obvious behaviors an agent could not infer from 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the core purpose and the sibling contrast, and most sentences carry real interpretive value. It is somewhat long and ends with a stray artifact token ('[#a02f68]') that serves no purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a six-parameter read-only analytics tool with no output schema, the description covers the domain concepts an agent needs (verdict taxonomy, verdict_reason values, settling behavior) thoroughly enough that no essential context is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so all six filters are already documented in the schema; the description adds almost no per-parameter syntax or format detail. It only indirectly touches `days` via the 'finalised enough days either side' remark, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource — what changed on your listings and whether the change worked — and explicitly frames itself against the sibling channel_performance ('that says what to fix, this says whether the last fix landed'). An agent can distinguish it from channel_performance without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Names the alternative (channel_performance) and the condition that separates them, then gives explicit interpretive guidance: read `verdict_reason` before saying anything, treat `unmeasurable` as normal, and don't attribute `confounded` to the most recent change. This is close to a full when-to-use/when-not-to-use contract.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools