Fetch Rothy's product details by handle. Returns normalized JSON for a product's URL slug, so you can retrieve structured storefront data without scraping.
Get a Rothy's product. Returns normalized product detail for one Rothy's (https://www.rothys.com) product handle. The storefront URL is fixed server-side; handle is the product's URL slug.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| handle | Yes | Product handle |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.16.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool returns normalized product detail and that the base URL is fixed server-side, which is useful. However, it does not describe response fields, error behavior, or any access requirements, leaving some uncertainty for a tool with no annotation safety hints.
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 concise sentences, no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the second sentence provides exactly the parameter clarification needed. 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 single-parameter, single-item read tool, the description is nearly complete: it explains what the tool returns, what the input means, and that the base URL is fixed. It could be stronger by elaborating on what 'normalized product detail' contains, especially since there is no output schema, but the essential invocation context is solid.
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 only says 'Product handle' with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful extra meaning by clarifying that handle is the product's URL slug and that the storefront URL is fixed server-side, which helps the agent construct a correct call.
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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get a Rothy's product.' It further specifies that it returns normalized product detail for exactly one product handle, distinguishing it from sibling tools like rothys_products or rothys_product_recommendations. The scope is unambiguous.
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 makes clear this tool is for retrieving a single product by its URL slug, and notes the storefront URL is fixed server-side. It does not explicitly say when not to use it or name alternative tools, but the singular 'one product handle' gives clear usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.