ah_get_products_bulkFetch details for multiple Albert Heijn products at once by supplying a list of product IDs, with responses cached for up to 24 hours.
Fetch product details in bulk for multiple Albert Heijn product IDs (e.g. ['wi196825', 'wi187593']). Cached for up to 24 hours.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| product_ids | Yes | List of product IDs (e.g. ['wi196825', 'wi187593']) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuinely useful behavioral fact beyond the annotations: results are cached for up to 24 hours, which tells the agent data may be stale and that repeat calls are cheap. It stops short of describing error behavior for invalid IDs.
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 with zero waste: the core action plus its scope comes first, followed by the caching caveat. Nothing is repeated or padded.
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, read-only lookup with full schema coverage and no output schema, this covers what an agent needs to select and call it. The only gap is the absence of any batch-size or failure-mode guidance for the bulk aspect.
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 coverage is 100% and there is only one required parameter, so the schema already carries nearly all semantics (array of strings, minItems 1). The description's example ID list duplicates the schema example rather than adding format rules such as batch limits or ID validation.
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 ('fetch product details') and explicitly scopes it to bulk retrieval across multiple Albert Heijn product IDs, with a concrete ID example. The 'bulk' framing implicitly separates it from the singular ah_get_product sibling, though it never names that alternative.
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 bulk-for-multiple framing implies when this tool is preferred over the single-product sibling, but no explicit 'use ah_get_product when you only need one' guidance or size/rate caveats are given. Usage is inferable from the description rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.