lightbulb-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

shopify_list_discounts

Read-onlyIdempotent

List active and historical discount codes and automatic discounts in the shop to audit promotions and review discount performance.

Instructions

List active and historical discount codes / automatic discounts in the shop.

Args: limit: Maximum discounts to return (1-250). project_id: Authenticated Project UUID. project_ref: Exact project correlation reference. connector_account_ref: Project-bound connector account alias. idempotency_key: Stable business-action identity. effect: Required and must be read; Spring verifies it. approval_ref: Approved platform task UUID when resuming a write.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`effect`	Yes
`project_id`	No
`project_ref`	No
`approval_ref`	No
`idempotency_key`	No
`connector_account_ref`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed7 schema fields changedv0.1.1Sep 7, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / approval_ref

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Approval Ref"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / connector_account_ref

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Connector Account Ref"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / effect

Added value: +{
+  "const": "read",
+  "title": "Effect",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / idempotency_key

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Idempotency Key"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / project_id

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Project Id"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / project_ref

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Project Ref"
+}

addedInput schema / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "effect"
+]
```

First observedv0.1.0Jun 25, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already provide a strong safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, destructiveHint=false). The description adds a small amount of behavioral context by noting the tool returns both active and historical discounts and that the effect parameter is required and must be 'read'. It does not contradict annotations, but it does not disclose additional behaviors like pagination limits or response structure.

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?

The description is front-loaded with a single-sentence purpose followed by a compact parameter list. Every item carries some value; there is minimal fluff. The parameter list is longer due to seven entries, but each has a short explanation. It is structured and easy to scan.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's simplicity, the presence of an output schema, and rich annotations, the description is adequately complete. It explains the resource scope, all parameters, and the required effect. It does not discuss return value details, but the output schema covers that. Missing explicit mention of pagination beyond the limit parameter is a minor gap for a list tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. The Args section provides meaning for all seven parameters beyond the schema: limit has a range, project_id is a UUID, effect is described as required and verified, and approval_ref is explained as relevant when resuming a write. This goes beyond the bare schema definitions, though many entries are generic platform context rather than discount-specific semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

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: 'List active and historical discount codes / automatic discounts in the shop.' It clearly identifies the tool's domain (discounts) and scope (active and historical, both code and automatic types), which distinguishes it from the many other shopify_list_* tools in the sibling list. The one-line purpose is unambiguous.

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 guidance is provided about when to choose this tool over alternatives, nor any exclusions or comparisons to sibling list tools. The only context is the purpose statement, which implies usage but does not explicitly state when this tool should be used versus others. There is no 'when not to use' information.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server