Fetch normalized static page details for a PSA Team Store page by handle, with the storefront URL fixed server-side.
Get a PSA Store static page. Returns normalized static page detail for one PSA Team Store (https://store.psacard.com) page handle. The storefront URL is fixed server-side.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| handle | Yes | Page handle |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It adds useful context: the output is 'normalized static page detail' and the storefront URL is 'fixed server-side.' It does not explicitly state read-only behavior, error cases, or response structure, but the simple 'Get' framing covers the core expectation.
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 sentences, no filler, and the key fact that this is for one page handle is front-loaded. Every sentence earns its place.
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?
For a one-parameter read-style tool, the description gives enough to select and invoke it: what it returns, what the handle is for, and that the URL is fixed. There is no output schema, so the description could say a bit more about the shape of the normalized detail, but the tool is simple enough that this is a minor gap.
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?
The schema already documents 'handle' as a string with 100% coverage. The description reinforces that it is a single page handle and that the URL is fixed server-side, but it does not add significant new meaning beyond what the schema provides.
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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get a PSA Store static page' and 'Returns normalized static page detail for one ... page handle.' The singular handle phrasing distinguishes it from sibling tools like psastore_pages (listing) and psastore_product (product detail).
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?
The description implies when to use the tool: when a single static page handle is needed. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, such as preferring psastore_pages for listing pages or psastore_collections for collections.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.