Search Walmart products by keyword, page, and sort order to get structured item IDs, titles, brands, prices, images, availability, sellers, and ratings.
Search Walmart products. Returns Walmart search results: item id, title, brand, price, image, availability, seller, and rating per product.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| q | Yes | Search query | |
| page | No | 1-based page number (default 1) | |
| sort | No | Sort order |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Input schema / properties / sort / enumAdded value: +[
+ "best_match",
+ "price_low",
+ "price_high",
+ "best_seller",
+ "new_arrivals",
+ "rating_high"
+]v1.5.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It usefully enumerates the returned fields (price, availability, seller, rating), but says nothing about pagination behavior despite a page parameter, result counts, or rate/region limitations for a storefront search.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and followed by the return shape. Nothing is padded or redundant.
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 simple read-only search with no output schema and fully documented parameters, the description covers the operation and return fields adequately. Only pagination and result-set size behavior are left unaddressed.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100% with all three parameters documented, including the sort enum, so the schema already does the explanatory work. The description adds no query syntax, sort semantics, or pagination guidance beyond it.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ("Search Walmart products") plus the shape of the result set. It does not distinguish itself from adjacent siblings like walmart_product or other retail search tools, but the core operation 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?
No statement of when to use this versus walmart_product (direct lookup by id) or other marketplace search tools, and no prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is only implied by the word "search".
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.