Search Amazon products using a keyword, with optional sort order and page number, to retrieve normalized product result cards in clean JSON.
Search Amazon products. Returns normalized Amazon search result cards for amazon.com.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| k | Yes | Search keyword | |
| s | No | Sort order | |
| page | No | 1-based page number |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.6.0v1.6.0v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior; it only mentions returning normalized result cards but fails to explain pagination, sorting, or any side effects or limitations.
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?
The description is concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the action, but it could include more context without being excessively long.
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, and the description does not explain what 'normalized Amazon search result cards' entails, nor does it cover sorting or page behavior, leaving gaps for a search tool.
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 the description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for parameters, meeting the baseline of 3.
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?
The description clearly states it searches Amazon products and returns normalized search result cards for amazon.com, differentiating it from sibling tools like amazon_product and amazon_suggest.
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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., amazon_suggest for suggestions or amazon_product for details), no exclusions or contextual prerequisites provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.