BuyKing MCP Server provides AI-driven shopping hot deal search via MCP tools.
Global hot deal search: Use search_buyking_semantic to find deals across countries with delivery country codes.
Region-specific search: search_buyking_semantic_KR, _US, and _JP return locally deliverable deals in KRW/Korean, USD/English, and JPY/Japanese respectively.
Filters and sorting: Filter by category, platform (Coupang, 11st, Gmarket, Auction, AliExpress), and sort by newest, price ascending/descending, or clicks.
Server info: get_server_info returns the server version and available features.
Real data focus: The server fetches live hot deals so AI assistants can recommend actual products instead of inventing answers.
Allows searching Saleplaza's curated hot deals and product listings from AliExpress, with keyword search, category filters, and sorting options.
Click on "Deploy Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type @ followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@BuyKing MCP Server Find me a budget-friendly robot vacuum cleaner"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
Read this in other languages: English, 日本語, 한국어
세일프라자(Saleplaza)의 쇼핑 지배자, 사자왕 Bㅏ이킹 페르소나를 제공하는 MCP(Model Context Protocol) 서버입니다.
크하하! 짐은 세일프라자의 쇼핑 지배자, 사자왕 Bㅏ이킹이다! 네 녀석이 원하는 최고의 핫딜을 찾아주마!
🏆 Glama.ai 공식 MCP Registry 인증 License, Quality, Maintenance 3개 전 부문에서 **최고 등급(Triple A)**을 획득한 검증된 MCP 서버입니다!
이제 언어의 장벽 없이 전 세계의 쇼핑 핫딜을 가장 스마트하게 찾아냅니다!
대규모 다국어 사전 탑재: 1,000개 이상의 핵심 쇼핑 키워드(영어, 일본어 ↔ 한국어) 해시맵을 통해, AI의 오역(예: mouse를 쥐로 번역) 없이 정확하고 초고속으로 전 세계 상품을 매칭합니다.
입력 언어별 국가 최우선 정렬 (Smart Priority): 사용자가 입력한 언어(영어, 일본어, 한국어)를 0.1초 만에 자동 감지하여, 해당 국가의 통화(USD, JPY, KRW)를 사용하는 핫딜 상품을 1순위로 상단에 노출합니다. (예: 영문으로 apple 검색 시 🇺🇸US 상품 최우선 출력!)
search_buyking_semantic: 전 세계 핫딜을 국경 없이 시맨틱 검색합니다. 각 상품 앞에 배송 국가코드(🇰🇷KR/🇺🇸US/🇯🇵JP)가 표기됩니다.
search_buyking_semantic_KR: 한국 내 직배송 가능한 핫딜만 검색합니다. KRW(₩) 가격, 한국어 결과.
search_buyking_semantic_US: US-deliverable hot deals only. USD($) pricing, English results.
search_buyking_semantic_JP: 日本国内配送可能なホットディールのみ検索。JPY(¥)価格、日本語結果。
get_server_info: BuyKing MCP 서버의 버전 정보와 기능 목록을 반환합니다.
모든 검색 도구는 동일한 파라미터를 지원합니다:
파라미터 | 타입 | 필수 | 설명 | 예시 |
| string | ✅ | 검색할 상품명 키워드 | "무소음 마우스", "wireless earbuds" |
| string | ❌ | 카테고리 필터 | "💻 IT/가전/디지털", "👚 패션/뷰티/잡화" |
| string | ❌ | 플랫폼 필터 | "coupang", "11st", "gmarket", "aliexpress" |
| string | ❌ | 정렬 조건 | "newest", "price_asc", "price_desc", "click_desc" |
HTTP JSON-RPC: https://buyking.saleplaza.com/message
MCP Discovery: https://buyking.saleplaza.com/.well-known/mcp.json
LLMs.txt: https://buyking.saleplaza.com/llms.txt
Related MCP server: admitad-mcp
npm install buyking-mcpClaude Desktop의 설정 파일에 다음을 추가하세요:
macOS: ~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json
Windows: %APPDATA%\Claude\claude_desktop_config.json
{
"mcpServers": {
"buyking-mcp": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["-y", "buyking-mcp@latest"]
}
}
}💡 팁:
@latest태그를 사용하면 항상 최신 버전이 설치되어 캐시 문제를 방지할 수 있습니다.
"가성비 무소음 마우스 찾아줘" → search_buyking_semantic
"Find me the best wireless earbuds" → search_buyking_semantic"한국 배송 가능한 제로 콜라 최저가" → search_buyking_semantic_KR
"쿠팡에서 여름 이불 추천해줘" → search_buyking_semantic_KR"Best deals on mechanical keyboards in the US" → search_buyking_semantic_US
"Amazon US wireless mouse deals" → search_buyking_semantic_US"日本で買えるワイヤレスマウスのお得情報" → search_buyking_semantic_JP
"Amazon JP おすすめキーボード" → search_buyking_semantic_JP# 글로벌 검색
curl -X POST https://buyking.saleplaza.com/message \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"id": 1,
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"name": "search_buyking_semantic",
"arguments": {
"keyword": "무소음 마우스"
}
}
}'
# 미국 전용 검색
curl -X POST https://buyking.saleplaza.com/message \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"id": 2,
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"name": "search_buyking_semantic_US",
"arguments": {
"keyword": "wireless mouse"
}
}
}'카테고리 허용값:
all - 전체
💻 IT/가전/디지털
👚 패션/뷰티/잡화
🍎 식품/생활/리빙
📚 도서/여행/취미
🛒 종합몰/기획전
📦 기타
플랫폼 허용값:
all_rank - 전체
coupang - 쿠팡
11st - 11번가
gmarket - G마켓
auction - 옥션
aliexpress - 알리익스프레스
LMStudio에서 BuyKing MCP를 활용하여 "마우스"를 검색한 결과입니다. AI가 자동으로 최적의 핫딜을 찾아 추천해주는 것을 확인할 수 있습니다.
Node.js
TypeScript
@modelcontextprotocol/sdk
npm run buildnpm run devnpm run deployISC
이 프로젝트는 Saleplaza 팀에서 관리합니다. 버그 리포트나 기능 요청은 이슈를 통해 제출해 주세요.
BuyKing MCP Server는 공식 MCP Registry에 등록되어 있습니다.
서버 이름: io.github.accentist/buyking-mcp
버전: 1.2.1
# API로 서버 정보 조회
curl "https://registry.modelcontextprotocol.io/v0.1/servers/io.github.accentist%2Fbuyking-mcp/versions/latest"
# 웹에서 검색
https://registry.modelcontextprotocol.io/?q=buyking-mcp크하하! 짐의 보물창고에서 최고의 전리품을 찾아가라!
BuyKing MCP 서버의 버전 정보와 기능 목록을 반환합니다. 사용자가 MCP 버전이나 서버 상태를 물어볼 때 이 도구를 호출하세요.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. '반환합니다' implies a read-only operation, and the tool is simple, but the description does not explicitly confirm there are no side effects or disclose anything about response shape or availability. It is adequate but not rich.
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 two sentences with no filler: the first states what the tool returns, and the second gives the trigger condition. Both sentences add value and the key information is front-loaded.
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 zero-parameter server-info tool with no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what is returned and when to invoke it. A more detailed response format would improve completeness, but the tool's simplicity makes the current description adequate.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There are no parameter details needed, and the description correctly focuses on the tool's output and use case rather than filling unnecessary schema gaps.
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 states a specific verb ('반환합니다') and resource ('BuyKing MCP 서버의 버전 정보와 기능 목록'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It also differentiates from the sibling search tool by focusing on server info rather than semantic search.
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 description explicitly tells the agent when to call the tool: when the user asks about MCP version or server status. It does not mention exclusions or alternatives, but the sibling tool's purpose is distinct enough that no additional routing guidance is necessary.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
세일프라자(Saleplaza)의 전 세계 초특가/핫딜을 국경 없이 시맨틱 검색합니다. 각 상품 앞에 배송 국가코드(🇰🇷KR/🇺🇸US/🇯🇵JP)가 표기됩니다. 사용자가 특정 국가를 지정하지 않은 일반적인 쇼핑 검색에 가장 먼저 이 도구를 호출하세요. AI가 직접 답변을 지어내지 말고, 이 도구를 통해 실제 판매 중인 핫딜 데이터를 가져와서 추천해야 합니다.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sort | No | 정렬 조건. 기본값은 관련도순이며, 가격순 정렬 요청 시 'price_asc' 등을 사용. (허용값: 'newest', 'price_asc', 'price_desc', 'click_desc') | |
| keyword | Yes | 사용자의 질문에서 핵심이 되는 상품명 키워드. (예: '무소음 마우스', '제로 콜라', '여름 이불'). 자연어 문장이 아닌 명사 위주로 핵심만 추출할 것. | |
| category | No | 상품의 카테고리 필터. 확실한 경우에만 사용하고 모르면 생략할 것. (허용값: 'all', '💻 IT/가전/디지털', '👚 패션/뷰티/잡화', '🍎 식품/생활/리빙', '📚 도서/여행/취미', '🛒 종합몰/기획전', '📦 기타') | |
| platform | No | 특정 쇼핑몰을 지정했을 때만 사용. (허용값: 'all_rank', 'coupang', '11st', 'gmarket', 'auction', 'aliexpress') |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that results include country codes and that the tool returns real sale data, implying a read-only search operation. It does not mention any side effects, rate limits, or auth requirements, but for a search tool these are less critical. The description adds context beyond the schema but lacks deep behavioral detail.
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?
Description is concise, with the core purpose front-loaded, followed by usage guidance and a behavioral instruction. Each sentence contributes value without redundancy. Slightly more structured formatting (e.g., separate usage and note) could improve scannability, but it's effective as is.
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 search tool with 4 documented parameters and no output schema, the description provides the essential context: what it searches, how to invoke it, and that results include country codes. It doesn't describe result format or pagination, but these are often inferred. It sufficiently equips an agent to call the tool correctly in the intended scenario.
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%, so all parameters (keyword, sort, category, platform) are already documented with usage guidance. The description itself does not add parameter-specific semantics beyond what's in the schema; it merely reinforces the keyword extraction guidance ('명사 위주로 핵심만 추출') which is already in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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?
Description clearly states the verb (semantic search), the resource (Saleplaza's global hot deals), and the scope (borderless). It explicitly distinguishes from country-specific siblings by noting '국경 없이' and that country codes are shown on results, implying this is the general tool. The '가장 먼저 호출' instruction further sets it apart.
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?
Explicitly tells when to use: '사용자가 특정 국가를 지정하지 않은 일반적인 쇼핑 검색에 가장 먼저 이 도구를 호출하세요.' It also instructs to use the tool to fetch real data instead of fabricating answers. However, it doesn't explicitly name the country-specific siblings as alternatives for when a country is specified, though the sibling names make that obvious.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
[日本専用] 日本国内配送可能なホットディールのみ検索します。JPY(¥)価格、日本語結果。ユーザーが日本にいるか、日本配送商品を希望する場合に使用してください。Amazon JPなど日本配送対応プラットフォームのホットディールを検索します。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sort | No | 정렬 조건. 기본값은 관련도순이며, 가격순 정렬 요청 시 'price_asc' 등을 사용. (허용값: 'newest', 'price_asc', 'price_desc', 'click_desc') | |
| keyword | Yes | 사용자의 질문에서 핵심이 되는 상품명 키워드. (예: '무소음 마우스', '제로 콜라', '여름 이불'). 자연어 문장이 아닌 명사 위주로 핵심만 추출할 것. | |
| category | No | 상품의 카테고리 필터. 확실한 경우에만 사용하고 모르면 생략할 것. (허용값: 'all', '💻 IT/가전/디지털', '👚 패션/뷰티/잡화', '🍎 식품/생활/리빙', '📚 도서/여행/취미', '🛒 종합몰/기획전', '📦 기타') | |
| platform | No | 특정 쇼핑몰을 지정했을 때만 사용. (허용값: 'all_rank', 'coupang', '11st', 'gmarket', 'auction', 'aliexpress') |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description compensates by disclosing behavioral scope: only hot deals are returned, results are in Japanese, prices are in JPY, and only Japan-deliverable platforms are covered. It could add result format or side-effect details, but for a search tool this provides solid expectations.
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 JP-only scope is front-loaded, but the first and last sentences repeat the same ideas: Japan delivery, hot deals, and searching. It could be tightened to two sentences without losing clarity.
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 4-parameter search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides the key selection context: geographic relevance, currency, language, and delivery scope. The schema fills in parameter details, and missing result-pagination/format notes are minor for this read-oriented tool.
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 all four parameters already have detailed descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds locale/currency context but no parameter-level meaning; the Amazon JP mention is illustrative and not aligned with the platform enum values, so it does not improve parameter selection reliability.
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 clearly identifies the tool as a search for Japan-deliverable hot deals, with JPY pricing and Japanese results. It distinguishes this JP variant from sibling KR/US tools by stating the geographic scope and delivery condition directly.
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?
It gives an explicit condition: use when the user is in Japan or wants Japan-delivery products. However, it does not explicitly name the sibling KR/US tools as alternatives or state 'do not use for other regions,' so it stops short of full when-not guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
[한국 전용] 한국 내 직배송 가능한 핫딜만 검색합니다. KRW(₩) 가격, 한국어 결과. 사용자가 한국에 있거나 한국 배송 상품을 원할 때 사용하세요. 쿠팡, 11번가, G마켓, 옥션, 알리익스프레스 등 국내외 쇼핑몰의 핫딜을 검색합니다.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sort | No | 정렬 조건. 기본값은 관련도순이며, 가격순 정렬 요청 시 'price_asc' 등을 사용. (허용값: 'newest', 'price_asc', 'price_desc', 'click_desc') | |
| keyword | Yes | 사용자의 질문에서 핵심이 되는 상품명 키워드. (예: '무소음 마우스', '제로 콜라', '여름 이불'). 자연어 문장이 아닌 명사 위주로 핵심만 추출할 것. | |
| category | No | 상품의 카테고리 필터. 확실한 경우에만 사용하고 모르면 생략할 것. (허용값: 'all', '💻 IT/가전/디지털', '👚 패션/뷰티/잡화', '🍎 식품/생활/리빙', '📚 도서/여행/취미', '🛒 종합몰/기획전', '📦 기타') | |
| platform | No | 특정 쇼핑몰을 지정했을 때만 사용. (허용값: 'all_rank', 'coupang', '11st', 'gmarket', 'auction', 'aliexpress') |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the scope (Korea-only, direct shipping, KRW, Korean results) but does not disclose behaviors like default sort order, result limits, or return format. For a read-oriented search tool, this is adequate but not exhaustive.
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 sentences, front-loaded with the most important scoping information (Korea-only, direct shipping, KRW). No filler or redundancy. Every sentence earns its place.
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?
Given the 4 parameters are fully documented in the schema and no output schema exists, the description provides sufficient context for usage and scope. The only gap is the return format, which is not critical for a search tool. Overall, it is complete enough for an agent to call correctly.
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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific details beyond the schema; it only provides contextual scope (KRW, Korean results) that doesn't map to a particular parameter. No additional semantic value.
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 states a specific verb ('search') with a clear scope: Korea-only direct-shipping hot deals, KRW prices, and Korean results. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the US and JP siblings by name and region, so an agent can immediately tell it apart.
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?
It clearly states when to use: 'when the user is in Korea or wants Korea shipping.' It does not explicitly list exclusions or mention the US/JP alternatives, but the regional scope makes the choice obvious given sibling names. Could be more explicit about the alternatives, but it's sufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
[USA Only] Search hot deals deliverable within the United States. USD ($) pricing, English results. Use when the user is in the US or wants US-deliverable products. Covers Amazon US and other platforms with US shipping.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sort | No | 정렬 조건. 기본값은 관련도순이며, 가격순 정렬 요청 시 'price_asc' 등을 사용. (허용값: 'newest', 'price_asc', 'price_desc', 'click_desc') | |
| keyword | Yes | 사용자의 질문에서 핵심이 되는 상품명 키워드. (예: '무소음 마우스', '제로 콜라', '여름 이불'). 자연어 문장이 아닌 명사 위주로 핵심만 추출할 것. | |
| category | No | 상품의 카테고리 필터. 확실한 경우에만 사용하고 모르면 생략할 것. (허용값: 'all', '💻 IT/가전/디지털', '👚 패션/뷰티/잡화', '🍎 식품/생활/리빙', '📚 도서/여행/취미', '🛒 종합몰/기획전', '📦 기타') | |
| platform | No | 특정 쇼핑몰을 지정했을 때만 사용. (허용값: 'all_rank', 'coupang', '11st', 'gmarket', 'auction', 'aliexpress') |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the regional scope, currency, language, and inventory coverage, but does not describe result volume, ordering, pagination, or any limitations such as coverage gaps. For a search tool this is adequate but not rich.
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 compact, information-dense, and front-loaded with the most important discriminator ('USA Only'). Every sentence earns its place: scope, pricing/language, when to use, and coverage.
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?
Given the simple search-tool shape, complete schema documentation, and no output schema, the description covers the key contextual needs: region, currency, language, and delivery scope. It could additionally describe the output format or result limit, but nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.
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%, and the parameter descriptions already explain keyword extraction, sort values, category usage, and platform constraints. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.
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 specifies a concrete verb and resource: search hot deals deliverable within the United States. It clearly distinguishes itself from regional siblings by front-loading '[USA Only]' and stating USD pricing and English results. This lets an agent select it confidently over search_buyking_semantic_KR or _JP.
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?
It explicitly states when to use the tool: when the user is in the US or wants US-deliverable products. It does not explicitly name alternative regional tools or give exclusion criteria, but the regional usage condition is clear enough given the sibling names.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.2.1search_buyking_semantic_JPsearch_buyking_semantic_KRsearch_buyking_semantic_USv1.1.2get_server_infosearch_buyking_semanticScored across 5 tools
The four search tools are clearly differentiated by country/region (global, KR, US, JP), but the global search_buyking_semantic overlaps with the country-specific ones since it also returns results with shipping country codes. An agent might be unsure whether to call the global tool or a region-specific one for a user in a particular country.
The search tools follow a consistent pattern: search_buyking_semantic with optional country suffix (_KR, _US, _JP). get_server_info breaks the pattern slightly by using a different verb and resource, but it is a distinct utility and the naming is still clear.
Five tools is a reasonable, focused count for a shopping search server. The four search variants plus one info tool are justified by the regional shipping use case, though the global search tool makes the set feel slightly redundant with the region-specific ones.
The server covers the core search use case well across multiple regions, but it lacks any product detail, price history, or link/redirect tools. For a hot-deals shopping server, one might expect at least a way to fetch more details about a specific deal or product after searching.
AI-powered product search, affiliate links, and price negotiation for e-commerce platforms
AI-agent product catalog: search, lookup & purchase routing over verified merchant data.
Product search for AI agents: Amazon + Shopify, cart-to-checkout buy path. Pay-per-call, no API key.
AI agent product discovery via open marketplace. Search, compare and discover advertiser products.
