Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

adidas_store

Retrieves details for a single Adidas retail store by store_id, including address, coordinates, opening hours, phone, status, and in-store services.

Instructions

Get an Adidas store. Returns detail for one Adidas retail store: name, status, phone, description, full address, coordinates, opening hours, and in-store services (e.g. Click and Collect, Free Wi-Fi). store_id is the numeric Adidas store id, taken from an adidas-stores response's stores[].id field. An unknown store_id returns a not-found error.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
store_idYesAdidas store id, from a stores response's stores[].id field

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.16.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden and does a good job: it enumerates the returned fields (name, status, phone, address, coordinates, hours, services) and discloses a concrete failure mode ('an unknown store_id returns a not-found error'). It omits auth or rate-limit context, keeping it from a 5.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded, followed by return contents, parameter sourcing, and the error case in short sentences. Minor redundancy between 'Get an Adidas store' and 'Returns detail for one Adidas retail store', but nothing is wasted.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a one-parameter lookup with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the return-field inventory and the not-found behavior an agent needs. Auth/permission context is the only meaningful gap.

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% and the single parameter is already documented in the schema, including its origin field. The description largely repeats that sourcing and only adds 'numeric', so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('Get an Adidas store') and clarifies it returns detail for ONE store, which separates it from the list-oriented adidas_stores sibling. It doesn't name that sibling explicitly as an alternative, so it stops short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: the reader learns the id must come from an 'adidas-stores response', which suggests this is a follow-up detail call. There is no explicit when-to-use statement or exclusion versus siblings like adidas_stores/adidas_search.

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