list_dealsRetrieve cp0x referral deals and filter by venue title or slug; returned links include a cp0x referral code.
List cp0x referral deals with optional venue filtering. Use this when looking for deals by venue or browsing the deal catalog; links include a cp0x referral code.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum number of deals; omit to return all matches. | |
| query | No | Substring of the venue title or slug. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one useful behavioral detail, that returned links include a cp0x referral code, but says nothing about result ordering, total counts or empty-result behavior.
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 compact sentences with the resource and scope front-loaded, then the usage condition. No filler.
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 simple read-only list tool with annotations and a fully described schema, the essentials are present, and the referral-code note is a nice addition. With no output schema, the description could still say more about the returned list shape or whether results are capped.
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%, with limit and query both fully documented, so the baseline is 3. The phrase 'optional venue filtering' loosely aligns with the query parameter but adds no syntax or matching detail beyond the schema.
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: list cp0x referral deals, with optional venue filtering. It partially distinguishes itself from get_deal by framing this as catalog browsing, but does not explicitly name the sibling it is not.
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 says to use it when looking for deals by venue or browsing the deal catalog, giving clear context for selection. It stops short of naming get_deal as the alternative for a single lookup, so the routing is implied rather than spelled out.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.