Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

stevemadden_product_recommendations

Fetch recommended products for a Steve Madden product handle by specifying related or complementary intent.

Instructions

List Steve Madden product recommendations. Returns recommended products for one Steve Madden (https://www.stevemadden.com) product handle. The storefront URL is fixed.

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?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the storefront URL is fixed (so no URL param is needed) and that it operates per-product, but says nothing about return format, pagination, or rate limits.

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 core action. Slight redundancy between the first two sentences ('List... recommendations' vs 'Returns recommended products'), but no wasted filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a recommendation-list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers what it does and the fixed-URL constraint, but omits anything about the shape or size of results, leaving the agent to infer.

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 handle, limit, and intent are already documented in the schema. The description only restates the single-handle input and adds no semantics for limit or the related/complementary intent.

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+resource ('List Steve Madden product recommendations') and clarifies the input is a single product handle. It's clearly distinguishable from a generic product-list tool, though it doesn't name which sibling to prefer for adjacent needs (e.g., stevemadden_product detail).

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?

No explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites stated, and no alternatives named among the many sibling tools (stevemadden_product, stevemadden_products, stevemadden_collections). The 'one product handle' phrasing only hints at the input requirement.

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