depix-mcp

Official

by depixapp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Hybrid

List a product's checkouts

list_product_checkouts

Read-only

Retrieve checkouts created from a product. Filter by status and paginate results.

Instructions

List checkouts created from a product. Requires scope merchant_read.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "product_id": "<product_id>"
    },
    "name": "list_product_checkouts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`offset`	No
`status`	No
`product_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	Yes
`stats`	Yes
`offset`	Yes
`has_more`	Yes
`checkouts`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 9, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds the scope requirement, which is valuable context beyond annotations. No contradictions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences: one for purpose, one for scope. Efficient and front-loaded with key information, no redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Has an output schema (not provided), but description omits parameter guidance for pagination and filtering. For a list tool with 4 parameters, this is a moderate gap. Agent would need to infer from schema defaults and enums.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate by explaining parameters like product_id, limit, offset, and status. It does not, leaving the agent to rely solely on schema types and defaults, which may be insufficient for understanding filtering and pagination.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'List checkouts created from a product', specifying the verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_checkouts' (which lists all checkouts) and 'get_checkout'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly requires 'merchant_read' scope, providing a prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_checkouts' for all checkouts, though the product-specific focus implies it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server