Retrieve all price rows for a product by passing its exact pricing-scheme IDs. Use it to fetch product pricing details from inFlow Inventory for quotes, orders, or syncs.
Get all price rows for a product using exact pricing-scheme IDs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| productId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.4.0-alpha.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read via 'Get', but says nothing about pagination, whether scheme names are resolved, auth requirements, or the shape of returned rows.
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?
One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource. No filler, though the misleading pricing-scheme clause costs some 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?
No output schema, no annotations, and an undocumented required parameter. For a retrieval tool whose return values and identifier format are entirely unspecified, the description does not provide enough to call it confidently.
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 0% and the single required parameter productId is undocumented in both schema and description. Worse, the phrase 'pricing-scheme IDs' suggests a parameter that does not exist, adding confusion rather than clarifying productId's format.
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 verb+resource (get price rows for a product) is clear and it contrasts with the write sibling set_product_prices. However, the trailing clause 'using exact pricing-scheme IDs' describes something the schema does not support — the only input is productId — which muddies the stated purpose.
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 when-to-use guidance and no named alternatives. The reader can infer it is the read counterpart to set_product_prices, but nothing states that, nor whether it should be used instead of list_pricing_schemes for price lookups.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.