Fetch a SparkFun product's metadata, price, stock, images, categories, and recommendations by SKU.
Get a SparkFun product. Returns public product metadata, price, stock status, images, categories, a cleaned description, and SparkFun-related product recommendations for one SKU.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sku | Yes | SparkFun product SKU |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.16.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the operation returns public product data, which signals a read-only lookup, and lists the data categories returned. However, it does not address error behavior, rate limits, or confirm there are no side effects.
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 a single sentence that front-loads the core action ('Get a SparkFun product') and then lists the returned data types. There is no filler or redundancy, making it well-structured for quick comprehension.
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 lookup with no output schema, the description does a solid job of outlining the return content (price, stock, images, categories, recommendations). It would benefit from noting that it is not a search endpoint, but the tool's simplicity means little is missing.
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 describes the sole parameter `sku` as 'SparkFun product SKU' (100% coverage), so the schema carries the semantic weight. The description only reinforces this by saying 'for one SKU,' adding no meaningful new detail.
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 'Get a SparkFun product,' a specific verb and resource, then enumerates the returned fields (metadata, price, stock, images, categories, cleaned description, recommendations). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like sparkfun_search and sparkfun_category by requiring a single SKU.
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 phrase 'for one SKU' implies this tool is for exact SKU lookups, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over sparkfun_search or sparkfun_category, nor does it name any alternative. As a result, usage guidance remains implicit rather than explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.