Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official

poshmark_brands

Fetch Poshmark's full brand directory to resolve any brand name to the exact slug, logo, and aliases its search and category filters expect.

Instructions

Get the full Poshmark brand directory. Returns Poshmark's full brand directory: every brand Poshmark recognizes (name, slug, logo, known aliases), not just brands with active listings for a given search or category filter. Useful for resolving a brand name to the exact value the brand/search filters expect.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It usefully discloses the completeness guarantee (all recognized brands, including aliases) and the returned fields (name, slug, logo, aliases), which substitutes for a missing output schema. However, it says nothing about size, pagination, or rate/auth limits for a directory that could be large.

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-loads the core action and stays short (three sentences). Minor waste: 'Get the full Poshmark brand directory' and 'Returns Poshmark's full brand directory' say largely the same thing before the differentiating scope clause.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and no parameters, the description compensates by enumerating the return contents and the scope distinction, which is enough for an agent to call a simple directory endpoint correctly. It could be more complete on volume/pagination for a full-brand dump.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool takes zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies a parameter-less, full-directory pull and adds no misleading parameter expectations.

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 the full Poshmark brand directory') and clarifies scope: every brand recognized, not just those with active listings. It implicitly separates itself from filtered siblings like poshmark_search/poshmark_category by contrasting full-directory vs filtered results, though it never names the singular poshmark_brand sibling, and the opening sentence is partly restated by the second.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Provides a concrete use case: resolving a brand name to the exact value the brand/search filters expect. That gives clear context for why an agent would call it, but there is no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or naming of the alternative tools (e.g. poshmark_brand for a single brand).

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