Check a Shopify store's identity and granted access scopes to verify permissions before running GraphQL operations.
Inspect store identity and granted access scopes.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| store | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds a useful hint about the return focus—store identity and granted scopes—but does not discuss auth, rate limits, or other behavioral traits.
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 a single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. For a one-parameter read-only introspection tool, this is appropriately concise and every word contributes meaning.
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?
The description states what is inspected, but there is no output schema and no clarification of what 'store identity' includes or how the 'store' parameter should be formatted. It is adequate for a simple tool but not fully self-sufficient.
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 only required parameter, 'store', has no description in the schema and the schema description coverage is 0%. The tool description never mentions the parameter, so an agent must infer whether 'store' means a domain, handle, or ID from the parameter name alone.
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 uses the specific verb 'Inspect' and names the exact resource: store identity and granted access scopes. It clearly conveys what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish it from similarly scoped siblings like shopify_get_shop_info.
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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as shopify_get_shop_info or shopify_switch_shop. The purpose clause implies usage when store identity or access scopes are needed, but there are no explicit conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.