Read notes, announcements, and restocking alerts pinned to a store's bulletin board. Provide a store ID to check current updates.
Read notes, announcements, and restocking alerts pinned to the store's physical-style bulletin board.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| store_id | Yes | Store ID or slug |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It doesn't state whether results are paginated, how many notes are returned, whether alerts expire, or ordering. For a list tool with no annotations this is a significant gap.
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?
A single efficient sentence that front-loads the verb and resource and adds the content categories without waste.
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-purpose, single-parameter read tool this is close to sufficient, but with no annotations and no output schema the description should disclose basic return behavior (e.g., list shape, ordering) that an agent would otherwise need to discover.
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% for the single store_id parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds nothing about the parameter's semantics beyond what the schema documents.
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 (Read) and resource (bulletin board) and enumerates the content types (notes, announcements, restocking alerts). It clearly distinguishes itself from post_bulletin_note and delete_bulletin_note by being the read-side tool, though it doesn't name them explicitly.
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?
Read-only intent is implied by 'Read' and the sibling set makes the read/write split obvious, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives such as the get_store_message_receiver tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.