Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

ohpolly_product_recommendations

Get related or complementary Oh Polly product recommendations from a product handle, with optional limit up to 20, for cross-sell and discovery.

Instructions

List Oh Polly product recommendations. Returns recommended products for one Oh Polly (https://www.ohpolly.com) product handle. The storefront URL is fixed server-side.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum products, defaults to 10 and supports up to 20
handleYesProduct handle
intentNoRecommendation intent. Allowed values: related, complementary

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.17.5
    • addedInput schema / properties / intent / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "related",
+  "complementary"
+]
  2. Addedv1.16.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does add one genuinely useful fact beyond the schema: the storefront URL is fixed server-side, so the agent knows not to attempt a URL parameter. Beyond that it is silent on safety profile (read-only), pagination, and rate behavior.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and scope. There is mild redundancy between 'List Oh Polly product recommendations' and 'Returns recommended products for one... handle,' but nothing that wastes meaningful space.

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 read-only listing tool with only three fully documented parameters and no output schema, the essential facts (what is returned, scoped to a handle, no URL control) are present. The main gap is any indication of result shape or count behavior, though the limit parameter partially covers the latter.

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 description coverage is 100%, so limit, handle, and intent are already documented in the input schema, including the enum values. The description only restates that recommendations are keyed to a single product handle, adding no format or syntax detail beyond the schema. 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: 'List Oh Polly product recommendations,' scoped to 'one Oh Polly product handle.' That is far clearer than a bare name restatement. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the many nearby siblings (ohpolly_product, ohpolly_products, ohpolly_collection_products), leaving the agent to infer that this is the recommendation engine rather than a plain product list.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description implies the precondition (you need a product handle) but never states when to pick this over ohpolly_product or ohpolly_products, nor any when-not conditions. No alternatives are named, so routing depends entirely on the agent guessing from the tool name.

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