Fetch Amazon product details by ASIN to get pricing, availability, overview, review samples, and descriptive content.
Retrieve Amazon product details. Returns product details for an Amazon ASIN on amazon.com, including pricing, availability, overview data, inline review samples, and descriptive content.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| asin | Yes | Amazon ASIN | |
| currency | No | Amazon currency | |
| language | No | Amazon language |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Input schema / properties / currency / enumAdded value: +[
+ "USD"
+]Input schema / properties / language / enumAdded value: +[
+ "en_US"
+]v1.6.0v1.6.0v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations, so the description carries the full burden. "Retrieve" signals a read operation and the enumeration of returned fields (pricing, availability, review samples) adds useful context. However, it says nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, caching/staleness, or regional constraints beyond amazon.com.
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 operation and then the return contents. No boilerplate or filler. Could be marginally shorter but every clause carries 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?
No output schema exists, so the description commendably enumerates the returned sections (pricing, availability, overview, review samples, descriptive content). With full schema coverage on a simple three-parameter read tool, little else is needed; only read-only/permission framing is missing.
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 100%, so both currency and language enums (USD / en_US) are already documented structurally, and asin is self-describing. The description only reiterates the ASIN and marketplace, adding no syntax or formatting detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.
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 ("Retrieve Amazon product details") and enumerates what is returned (pricing, availability, overview, review samples, descriptive content). Scope is narrowed to an ASIN on amazon.com. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from amazon_search or amazon_suggest, but the ASIN-keyed detail fetch is naturally distinct.
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?
No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of alternatives such as amazon_search (find ASIN) or amazon_suggest. The required ASIN parameter implies a lookup after searching, but nothing in the text states this flow or any exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.