ecommerce-fashion-market-analysis
This server provides MCP tools for fashion e-commerce AI agents to perform SEO audits and trend analysis.
product_seo_audit — Audits a fashion product page for SEO best practices, returning:
A score (0–100)
Checks on meta title (ideal: 30–60 chars), meta description (ideal: 120–158 chars), Product JSON-LD structured data, image alt text, URL structure, H1, fashion-specific keywords (size, fit, material, color), and seasonal alignment (e.g., SS25, FW25)
Prioritized, actionable recommendations
Works across any platform (Shopify, Magento, custom) — no API key required
fashion_trend_analysis — Analyzes current fashion trends for a product category (denim, sneakers, bags, dresses, or custom), returning:
Trending keywords with search volume direction (up/down/stable)
Trending colors with hex codes and usage context
Silhouette trends labeled as rising/peaking/declining/stable
Price tier demand (entry, mid, premium, luxury)
Strategic key insights for content planning, merchandising, or product development
Filterable by market (US, EU, global), season, and timeframe (1 week to 1 year)
Can accept and enrich data from Tavily MCP for real-time trend intelligence
Both tools support verbose and max_words parameters to control output detail and manage token costs. The server also comes with a skill pack of 12 markdown playbooks that orchestrate these tools with other MCP servers (e.g., Shopify, Search Console, Meta Ads) for complex workflows like competitor intelligence, monthly trend reports, and seasonal drop planning.
Click on "Deploy Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@ecommerce-fashion-market-analysisRun a product SEO audit on a black leather jacket"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
E-commerce Fashion Market Analysis
Fashion intelligence MCP server for AI agents.
SEO audits, trend analysis, DTC demand forecasting, CRM enrichment, and campaign creative — built for Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, and any MCP-compatible agent.
Overview • Quick Start • Tools • Examples • Architecture • Skill Pack • Configuration
Overview
E-commerce Fashion Market Analysis is a vertical MCP server that gives your AI agent specialized fashion intelligence: SEO auditing, trend research, DTC demand forecasting, CRM segment enrichment, and campaign creative generation. It runs locally via stdio — no cloud deployment required.
Built by alexgenovese.com for fashion brands, agencies, and creators.
What is MCP? Model Context Protocol is an open standard that lets AI agents call external tools. This server exposes fashion-specific tools that any MCP-compatible client (Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, Gemini CLI, opencode) can discover and use.
What it does
Capability | Without this server | With Fashion MCP |
SEO audit | Manual checklist, generic advice | Automated score 0-100 with 5 dimension scores and fashion-specific checks (fit, material, color, season, schema, OG, Twitter Cards) |
Trend research | Generic Google searches | Category-level trend intelligence with keywords, colors, silhouettes, price tiers, market fit, evidence, and confidence |
Demand forecasting | Spreadsheets + gut feel | Explainable weighted-rule forecast: |
CRM enrichment | Static segments | Customer segments enriched with trending colors/silhouettes/keywords + audience clusters + ready-to-send messaging |
Campaign creative | Copywriter per channel | Platform-specific campaign themes, hooks, value propositions, and creative briefs grounded in trend data |
Why it's different
This server needs no API keys.
product_seo_audit,dtc_forecast_analysis,category_demand_outlook,customer_trend_enrichment, andcampaign_theme_recommendationall work with data you provide directly. Onlyfashion_trend_analysisneeds upstream search data, which comes from the separate Tavily MCP server (install it alongside and setTAVILY_API_KEYthere — not here). Provider integrations (Shopify, Klaviyo, Meta Ads, etc.) are optional and read their own env vars when enabled.Explainable outputs. Every tool returns
assumptions[],dataGaps[],confidence, andrecommendedNextCalls[]— your agent always knows what it's missing.Write-back is opt-in. Default
dry_run: true. PII filtering on every write-back. Forecasts use aggregated segments, never personal profiles.Local SQLite persistence. Zero-config (
~/.fashion-mcp/store.db) for snapshots, TTL cache, feature store, and forecast actuals for backtesting.Tool-agnostic skill pack. 16 playbooks use
~~categoryplaceholders so they work with any MCP server in that category (swap Shopify for WooCommerce without touching the skill).
Related MCP server: Gadget MCP Server
Quick Start
Install
git clone https://github.com/alexgenovese/ecommerce-fashion-market-analysis.git
cd ecommerce-fashion-market-analysis
npm install
npm run buildConnect to your AI agent
claude mcp add fashion -- node /path/to/ecommerce-fashion-market-analysis/dist/index.jsThen in chat:
Run a product SEO audit on "Black Leather Jacket" — url: https://mystore.com/products/black-leather-jacket, category: Outerwear, brand: Acne Studios
Add to .cursor/mcp.json:
{
"mcpServers": {
"fashion": {
"command": "node",
"args": ["/path/to/ecommerce-fashion-market-analysis/dist/index.js"]
}
}
}Add to your agent's MCP config:
{
"mcpServers": {
"fashion": {
"command": "node",
"args": ["/path/to/ecommerce-fashion-market-analysis/dist/index.js"]
}
}
}Add to ~/.config/opencode/opencode.json or the project's opencode.json:
{
"mcp": {
"fashion": {
"type": "local",
"command": ["node", "/path/to/ecommerce-fashion-market-analysis/dist/index.js"],
"enabled": true
}
}
}Then restart opencode for the changes to take effect.
Add to your VS Code settings.json (Cmd+Shift+P → "Preferences: Open User Settings (JSON)"):
{
"github.copilot.mcpServers": {
"fashion": {
"command": "node",
"args": ["/path/to/ecommerce-fashion-market-analysis/dist/index.js"]
}
}
}Add to your ~/.continue/config.json:
{
"experimental": {
"mcpServers": {
"fashion": {
"command": "node",
"args": ["/path/to/ecommerce-fashion-market-analysis/dist/index.js"]
}
}
}
}Connect directly without cloning:
{
"mcpServers": {
"fashion": {
"url": "https://ecommerce-fashion-market-analysis--alexgenovese.run.tools"
}
}
}Tools
The server exposes 6 tools. All accept verbose (0/1/2), max_words, and format (json | markdown) for cost control and output shaping. All return explainability blocks (assumptions, dataGaps, recommendedNextCalls).
product_seo_audit
Full SEO audit of a fashion product page. Returns a score (0-100) across 5 dimensions with actionable, role-specific recommendations.
Checks: meta title length, meta description, Product JSON-LD schema completeness, image alt text, URL structure, H1 presence, fashion keywords (size, fit, material, color), seasonal context, canonical URL, hreflang, Open Graph, Twitter Cards, title/URL/H1/schema mismatch.
Parameter | Required | Description |
| Yes | Product title |
| No | Full product URL |
| No | Meta description or product description |
| No | Product price |
| No | Product images with optional alt text |
| No | Product category |
| No | Brand name |
| No | Season context (e.g. "SS25", "FW25") |
| No | In stock? |
| No | 0=compact, 1=standard, 2=full (default: 1) |
| No | Max words in response (default: 200) |
| No |
|
Output: productTitle, score, dimensionScores (metadata, schema, content, images, fashion_relevance), checks[], recommendations[], structuredData, images[], team_actions[], assumptions[], dataGaps[], recommendedNextCalls[]
fashion_trend_analysis
Structured trend intelligence from Tavily MCP search data. Accepts results from tavily_search, tavily_search_dedup, and tavily_social_media_search — extracts trending keywords, colors, silhouettes, price tiers, market fit, and key insights.
Parameter | Required | Description |
| Yes | Product category (e.g. "denim", "sneakers", "bags") |
| No | Season filter (default: auto-detected) |
| No | Target market (e.g. "US", "EU", "global") |
| No | Results array from |
| No | AI-generated answer from Tavily ( |
| No | Results from |
| No | 0=compact, 1=standard, 2=full (default: 1) |
| No | Max words (default: 200) |
| No |
|
Output: category, season, market, generatedAt, trendingKeywords[] (with stage, confidence, evidence), trendingColors[] (with hex), silhouettes[] (rising/peaking/declining/stable), priceRanges[], marketFit (0-100), priceTierOpportunity[], keyInsights[], assumptions[], dataGaps[], recommendedNextCalls[], warnings[]
This tool doesnot make HTTP calls. It accepts data already gathered by Tavily MCP. Install Tavily MCP (@tavily/mcp) alongside — it handles search, this tool handles fashion analysis.
dtc_forecast_analysis
Weighted-rule demand forecast for DTC fashion brands. Combines a seasonal baseline with five explainable multipliers to produce a forecast score, confidence interval, driver contributions, risks, and scenario projections.
Forecast formula:
forecast = baseline × trend × media_efficiency × retention × inventory × seasonalityParameter | Required | Description |
| Yes | Product category |
| No | Target market |
| No | Season context |
| No |
|
| No | Current days of stock cover |
| No | Current campaign ROAS |
| No | Trend keywords from |
| No | Silhouette signals from |
| No |
|
Output: schemaVersion, data → baselineDemand, forecastScore, confidenceInterval (low/high, ±20%), drivers[] (name, contribution %, explanation), risks[], scenarios[] (base/upside/downside)
category_demand_outlook
Lightweight demand snapshot by category — direction, top trend drivers, price tier winners, and inventory risk flags. Faster and cheaper than a full forecast.
Output: schemaVersion, data → demandPulse (0-100), direction (up/down/stable), topDrivers[], priceTierWinners[], inventoryRiskFlags[]
customer_trend_enrichment
Enrich CRM customer segments with trend awareness. Maps trending keywords, colors, and silhouettes onto a segment profile and produces audience clusters with propensity scoring and a CRM-ready campaign message.
Output: schemaVersion, enrichedProfile, audienceClusters[] (name, propensity, recommendedAction), crmReadyMessage
campaign_theme_recommendation
Generate campaign themes for fashion brands with platform-specific copy, hooks, value propositions, and creative briefs grounded in trend data.
Output: schemaVersion, valueProposition, platformSpecific (format/tone/CTA), themeOptions[] (hooks, angles), creativeBrief (visual direction, copy angle, hashtags)
Useverbose: 0 to control token cost when running multiple calls. Use format: "json" for AI-agent consumption, format: "markdown" for human-readable reports. All tools are read-only by default; write-back is explicitly opt-in.
Examples
1. Product SEO Audit
Ask your AI agent:
Audit "Linen Blend Midi Dress" — price: $189, category: Dresses, brand: Mango, material: linen, color: cream. We're launching this for Summer 2025.
What happens: The tool checks meta title length (30-60 chars), meta description (120-158 chars), Product schema completeness, fashion keyword coverage, seasonal alignment, canonical, Open Graph, and Twitter Cards. Returns a score, 5 dimension scores, and prioritized fixes with role-specific team actions.
2. Trend Research for Seasonal Buying
Ask your AI agent:
What denim trends should I stock for this Fall? I run a contemporary denim brand.
What happens: The AI agent calls Tavily MCP (tavily_search) to get real web data, then passes the results to fashion_trend_analysis which extracts structured trend intelligence — keywords (with stage and confidence), colors (with hex), silhouettes (rising/peaking/declining), price tier opportunity, and a market fit score. No simulated data.
3. DTC Demand Forecast
Ask your AI agent:
Forecast demand for our sneakers category for the next 3 months in the US market. We have 45 days of stock cover and our campaigns are running at 3.5x ROAS.
What happens: dtc_forecast_analysis computes a baseline demand for sneakers in summer, applies five multipliers (trend, media efficiency, retention, inventory, seasonality), and returns a forecast score with a ±20% confidence interval, driver contributions (each explained), risk flags, and three scenarios (base/upside/downside).
4. CRM Segment Enrichment
Ask your AI agent:
Enrich our "VIP Female 25-35" segment (5,000 customers, prefers dresses and bags) with current Summer 2026 trends so we can target them.
What happens: customer_trend_enrichment maps trending keywords, colors, and silhouettes onto the segment, produces audience clusters with propensity scores, and generates a CRM-ready campaign message.
5. Full Competitive Intelligence Workflow
Ask your AI agent:
I'm launching a sneaker brand. Analyze the current sneaker market trends, forecast demand, audit our first product page for SEO, and generate campaign creative.
What happens: Four tools fire in sequence — fashion_trend_analysis maps the market, dtc_forecast_analysis forecasts demand, product_seo_audit checks the launch page, and campaign_theme_recommendation generates platform-specific creative. Combined output gives market positioning + demand forecast + page fixes + campaign briefs.
Architecture
The server is organized into 6 layers that separate data acquisition, domain logic, fashion intelligence, and forecasting:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ AI Agent │
│ (Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, Gemini CLI, opencode) │
└──────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────────┘
│
│ MCP stdio (JSON-RPC)
│ ListTools / CallTool
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ fashion-mcp-server (6-layer) │
│ │
│ ┌───────────────┐ ┌────────────────────────────────┐ │
│ │ Server Layer │ │ Domain Layer │ │
│ │ index.ts │ │ ├── schemas/ (16 Zod schemas) │ │
│ │ mcp.ts │ │ ├── entities/ (canonical) │ │
│ │ registry.ts │ │ ├── normalization/ │ │
│ │ errors.ts │ │ │ ├── taxonomy/ │ │
│ │ (7 classes) │ │ │ ├── resolver.ts │ │
│ └───────┬───────┘ │ │ └── trends.ts │ │
│ │ │ ├── scoring/ (SEO) │ │
│ │ │ └── forecasting/ │ │
│ │ │ ├── engine.ts │ │
│ │ │ ├── baseline.ts │ │
│ │ │ ├── multipliers.ts │ │
│ │ │ ├── scenarios.ts │ │
│ │ │ └── backtest.ts │ │
│ ▼ └────────────────────────────────┘ │
│ ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│ │ Services Layer │ │
│ │ trend-intelligence, seo-audit, demand-forecast │ │
│ │ feature-store │ │
│ └──────────────┬───────────────────────────────────┘ │
│ │ │
│ ┌───────────┴───────────┐ │
│ ▼ ▼ │
│ ┌─────────────────┐ ┌────────────────────────────┐ │
│ │ Provider Layer │ │ Storage Layer (SQLite) │ │
│ │ Shopify (6 mth) │ │ snapshots, cache (TTL), │ │
│ │ CRM (3: Klaviyo,│ │ features, forecast_actuals│ │
│ │ HubSpot, webhook)│ └────────────────────────────┘ │
│ │ Meta Ads, Google│ │
│ │ Ads, GA4, GSC │ ┌────────────────────────────┐ │
│ └─────────────────┘ │ Utils Layer │ │
│ │ text, dates, validation, │ │
│ │ pii-filter, write-back, │ │
│ │ env-check, logging │ │
│ └────────────────────────────┘ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Layer | Role |
Server | MCP stdio transport, tool registry, error taxonomy (7 classes with |
Domain | Canonical Zod schemas (16), entities, taxonomy (40+ colors, 30 silhouettes, 15 categories, 20 synonym groups), SEO scoring (15 audit functions), forecast engine (weighted rules + backtesting) |
Services | Trend intelligence, SEO audit, demand forecast, feature store orchestration |
Providers | Shopify (6 methods), CRM (Klaviyo + HubSpot stub + custom webhook), Meta Ads, Google Ads, GA4, Search Console — all normalize external payloads into canonical signals |
Storage | SQLite ( |
Utils | Text cleaning, date helpers, validation, PII filter (email/phone/card redaction), write-back guard ( |
Forecast engine
The forecast engine is a weighted-rule model that is fully explainable:
forecast_score = baseline_demand
× trend_multiplier
× media_efficiency_multiplier
× retention_multiplier
× inventory_multiplier
× seasonality_multiplierBaseline: 9 categories × 4 seasons with market adjustment
Multipliers: each returns a value and a human-readable explanation
Confidence interval: ±20% around the forecast score
Scenarios: base, upside (+20%), downside (-20%) with explicit adjustments
Driver contributions: each driver reports its contribution % and explanation
Backtesting: MAPE, WAPE, directional accuracy, bias, interval coverage — stored in
forecast_actualstable
Error taxonomy
7 error classes, all extending McpError with structured metadata:
Class | When | Retryable |
| Invalid input (Zod parse failure) | No |
| Missing/invalid provider credentials | No |
| Provider rate limit hit | Yes (backoff) |
| Provider unreachable | Yes |
| Payload can't be normalized | No |
| Forecast engine failure | No |
| No baseline for category/season | No |
Privacy & safety
PII filter:
stripPii()redacts emails, phone numbers, credit cards on every write-backAggregated-only forecasts: forecasts operate on segments, never personal profiles —
isAggregatedOnly()guardWrite-back opt-in: default
dry_run: true; must explicitly setallow_writeback: true+destinationto writeNon-blocking env checks: providers are optional; missing credentials degrade gracefully
Skill Pack
This repo includes 16 markdown playbooks in fashion-mcp-skills/skills/ that orchestrate MCP servers into fashion-specific workflows. Skills use tool-agnostic ~~category placeholders so they work with any MCP server in that category — swap vendors without touching the playbook.
Playbook | Problem it solves | Required categories |
| Full SEO audit for fashion e-commerce |
|
| Competitor analysis in 10 minutes |
|
| Compare your prices with competitors |
|
| Monthly trend report by category | fashion-mcp-server + |
| Fashion ad copy for FB/IG/TikTok |
|
| 360-degree fashion store audit | All categories |
| Sell-through, stockout risk, markdown alerts |
|
| Seasonal drop planning | fashion-mcp-server + |
| Fashion email campaigns |
|
| Weekly fashion social content | fashion-mcp-server + |
| Pre-launch checklist |
|
| AI search visibility score |
|
| DTC demand forecast | fashion-mcp-server ( |
| Quick demand snapshot | fashion-mcp-server ( |
| Enrich CRM with trend data | fashion-mcp-server ( |
| Campaign creative briefs | fashion-mcp-server ( |
See fashion-mcp-skills/CONNECTORS.md for the full category→placeholder mapping.
The skill pack is the primary product for 85% of the market. The MCP server is for early adopters comfortable with MCP setup. The skills work with any MCP-compatible agent — no custom server required.
Install skills
# Claude Code
cp -r fashion-mcp-skills/skills/* ~/.claude/skills/
# Cursor
cp -r fashion-mcp-skills/skills/* ~/.cursor/skills/
# Codex
cp -r fashion-mcp-skills/skills/* "${CODEX_HOME:-$HOME/.codex}/skills/"Configuration
This server itself needs no API keys to start — 5 of 6 tools (product_seo_audit, dtc_forecast_analysis, category_demand_outlook, customer_trend_enrichment, campaign_theme_recommendation) work with data you pass directly. The only prerequisite is TAVILY_API_KEY, which belongs to the separate Tavily MCP server that feeds search data to fashion_trend_analysis. Provider integrations (Shopify, Klaviyo, Meta Ads, etc.) are optional — set their env vars to enable them. Missing credentials degrade gracefully (non-blocking).
Variable | Required | Description |
| Yes (for Tavily MCP only) | Required by |
| No | Shopify store domain |
| No | Shopify Admin API access token |
| No | Klaviyo API key (CRM provider) |
| No | HubSpot API key (CRM provider, stub) |
| No | Custom CRM webhook URL |
| No | Meta Ads access token |
| No | Meta Ads account ID |
| No | Google Ads developer token |
| No | Google Ads customer ID |
| No | Google Analytics 4 property ID |
| No | Search Console service account email |
| No | Search Console private key |
| No | Set to |
A ready-to-use MCP config template is at .mcp.json.example.
fashion_trend_analysis requires Tavily MCP (@tavily/mcp) to gather search data first. Install both servers side by side — the AI agent orchestrates: Tavily MCP for search → this server for structured analysis. product_seo_audit works with data you provide directly and does not require any API keys.
Development
npm run dev # Dev mode with hot reload
npm run typecheck # Type checking
npm run build # Production build
npm run start # Run the server
npm test # Run unit + e2e tests (141 tests)
npm run test:watch # Watch modeTesting
The project includes 141 tests across 13 test files:
Suite | Tests | Coverage |
| 16 | Text cleaning, season detection, keyword/color/silhouette extraction, confidence, stage |
| 15 | All 15 SEO audit functions + dimension scoring + team actions |
| 12 | Baseline, multipliers, computeForecast, backtest metrics |
| 11 | Dictionary, synonyms, classifier, normalization |
| 7 | All 7 error classes with metadata |
| 7 | PII redaction, aggregated-only guard |
| 3 | Full MCP server lifecycle: ListTools + CallTool for 3 tools |
Add a new tool
Create
src/tools/<name>.tsDefine Zod input schema
Implement
execute<Name>functionExport tool object with
name,description,inputSchema,outputSchema,handlerRegister in
src/server/registry.ts
See docs/ARCHITECTURE.md for details.
Project Structure
src/ # MCP server (Node/TypeScript)
├── index.ts # Server entry point
├── server/ # Server layer
│ ├── mcp.ts # MCP bootstrap (ListTools + CallTool)
│ ├── registry.ts # Tool registry (6 tools)
│ └── errors.ts # Error taxonomy (7 classes)
├── domain/ # Domain layer
│ ├── schemas/ # 16 Zod schemas (canonical)
│ ├── entities/ # Core entities
│ ├── normalization/ # Taxonomy + entity resolution
│ │ ├── taxonomy/ # dictionary, synonyms, classifier
│ │ ├── resolver.ts # Entity dedup
│ │ ├── trends.ts # Keyword/color/silhouette extraction
│ │ └── tavily.ts # Content collection
│ ├── scoring/ # SEO scoring (15 audit functions)
│ ├── forecasting/ # Forecast engine + backtesting
│ │ ├── engine.ts # computeForecast
│ │ ├── baseline.ts # 9 categories × 4 seasons
│ │ ├── multipliers.ts # 5 multipliers
│ │ ├── scenarios.ts # base/upside/downside
│ │ └── backtest.ts # MAPE, WAPE, directional accuracy
│ └── recommendations/ # Team actions generator
├── services/ # Service layer
│ ├── trend-intelligence-service.ts
│ ├── seo-audit-service.ts
│ ├── demand-forecast-service.ts
│ └── feature-store-service.ts
├── providers/ # Provider layer (normalizers)
│ ├── shopify/ # 6 methods
│ ├── crm/ # Klaviyo, HubSpot, webhook
│ ├── meta-ads/
│ ├── google-ads/
│ ├── ga4/
│ └── search-console/
├── storage/ # SQLite storage (better-sqlite3, WAL)
├── utils/ # Utilities
│ ├── text.ts, dates.ts, validation.ts, logging.ts
│ ├── pii-filter.ts # PII redaction
│ ├── write-back.ts # Write-back guard
│ └── env-check.ts # Non-blocking env checks
├── tools/ # 6 tool implementations
├── types/fashion.ts # Shared types
└── __tests__/ # Unit + e2e tests (141)
fashion-mcp-skills/ # Skill pack (16 playbooks)
├── skills/ # Playbook .md files
├── CONNECTORS.md # Category→placeholder mapping
├── README.md
└── CLAUDE.md
docs/ # Project docs
├── ROADMAP.md # 8-sprint roadmap
├── PAIN-MATRIX.md # Pain analysis
├── ARCHITECTURE.md # Architecture details
├── MCP-INTEGRATION-GUIDE.md # External MCP integration
└── MARKETPLACE_DEPLOYMENT.md # Publishing guideRoadmap status
All 8 sprints from docs/ROADMAP.md are complete:
Sprint | Status | Deliverable |
1 — Structural refactor | ✅ Done | 6-layer architecture, 7 error classes, utils extraction |
2 — Canonical data model | ✅ Done | 16 Zod schemas, entities, taxonomy (40+ colors, 30 silhouettes), entity resolution |
3 — Connector layer + SQLite | ✅ Done | Shopify (6 methods), CRM (Klaviyo + HubSpot + webhook), Meta/Google Ads, GA4, GSC, SQLite |
4 — Tool v2.5 | ✅ Done | Confidence, evidence, stage, marketFit, priceTierOpportunity, dimension scores, explainability |
5 — Forecast engine | ✅ Done | Weighted-rule model, 4 new tools (forecast, demand outlook, enrichment, campaign) |
6 — Write-back + PII | ✅ Done | dry_run/allow_writeback/destination, PII filter, env checks |
7 — Backtesting | ✅ Done | MAPE, WAPE, directional accuracy, bias, interval coverage |
8 — Hardening | ✅ Done | 141 tests, e2e suite, skill pack placeholder refactor, CONNECTORS.md, .mcp.json.example |
Marketplace
Published on:
See docs/MARKETPLACE_DEPLOYMENT.md for deployment instructions.
Resources
MCP Protocol — Model Context Protocol specification
MCP Servers Directory — Community MCP server catalog
fashion-mcp-skills — Open-source skill pack for fashion retail
MCP Integration Guide — How to connect external MCP servers
Roadmap — 8-sprint development roadmap
Available Tools
2 toolsfashion_trend_analysisARead-onlyIdempotent
Analyze current fashion trends for a specific product category. Returns trending keywords (search volume direction), trending colors with hex codes, silhouette trends (rising/peaking/declining), price tier demand, and key strategic insights. Built-in data for: denim, sneakers, bags, dresses. Other categories return limited data with an invitation for custom research.
Use this when a fashion brand needs trend intelligence for content planning, product development, or seasonal merchandising strategy.
Cost control: use verbose (0=quick insight ~50 words, 1=standard ~200 words, 2=detailed ~500 words) and max_words to control output size and token cost.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| market | No | Target market (default: global) | |
| season | No | Season filter (default: current detected season) | |
| verbose | No | Output detail level: 0=minimal (top keywords + insights, ~50 words), 1=standard (~200 words), 2=detailed (~500 words). Default: 1. | |
| category | Yes | Product category (denim, sneakers, bags, dresses, or custom) | |
| max_words | No | Maximum words in response. Controls token cost. Default: 200. Overrides verbose budget if set. | |
| timeframe | No | Analysis timeframe (default: 1m) |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| market | Yes | |
| season | Yes | |
| category | Yes | |
| generatedAt | Yes | |
| keyInsights | Yes | |
| priceRanges | Yes | |
| silhouettes | Yes | |
| trendingColors | Yes | |
| trendingKeywords | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. Description adds behavioral details: returns specific output types, notes built-in data limitations for certain categories, and cost control via verbose/max_words. 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Concise at ~150 words, front-loaded with purpose, then details. Every sentence adds value. Well-structured with clear sections.
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?
With output schema present, description needn't detail return values. Covers main features: supported categories, output types, cost control, and usage context. Slightly lacking on how timeframe affects data, but adequate.
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 100%, baseline 3. Description adds value by explaining verbose levels (quick insight, standard, detailed) and cost control. Also mentions default season detection and category limitations. Contributes beyond 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?
Description clearly states 'Analyze current fashion trends for a specific product category' and lists specific outputs (keywords, colors, silhouettes, etc.). It mentions supported categories and distinguishes from sibling 'product_seo_audit' implicitly by focusing on trends.
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?
Explicit usage context: 'Use this when a fashion brand needs trend intelligence for content planning, product development, or seasonal merchandising strategy.' Also provides cost control guidance. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but clear enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
product_seo_auditARead-onlyIdempotent
Audit a fashion product page for SEO best practices. Checks meta title length, meta description, product structured data (JSON-LD), image alt text, URL structure, H1 presence, fashion-specific keywords (size, fit, material), and seasonal context. Returns a score (0-100), per-check results, and actionable recommendations.
Use this whenever a fashion brand wants to optimize a product listing for organic search. Works for any e-commerce platform (Shopify, Magento, custom).
Cost control: use verbose (0=quick check ~50 words, 1=standard ~200 words, 2=detailed ~500 words) and max_words to control output size and token cost.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | No | Full product URL | |
| tags | No | Product tags | |
| brand | No | Brand name | |
| price | No | Product price | |
| title | Yes | Product title (required) | |
| images | No | Product images with optional alt text | |
| season | No | Season context (e.g. Spring 2025, Fall/Winter 2025) | |
| verbose | No | Output detail level: 0=minimal (score + top issues, ~50 words), 1=standard (~200 words), 2=detailed (~500 words). Default: 1. | |
| category | No | Product category (e.g. Dresses, Sneakers, Bags) | |
| max_words | No | Maximum words in response. Controls token cost. Default: 200. Overrides verbose budget if set. | |
| collection | No | Collection name (e.g. Summer 2025, FW25) | |
| description | No | Meta description or product description | |
| availability | No | Whether the product is in stock |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| url | No | |
| score | Yes | |
| checks | Yes | |
| images | Yes | |
| productTitle | Yes | |
| structuredData | No | |
| recommendations | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable context: it checks multiple specific elements, returns a score per check and recommendations, and includes cost control details via verbose and max_words. 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is concise with 4 informative sentences, each serving a purpose. It is front-loaded with the main action. A slightly tighter structure could be possible, but it remains efficient.
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?
Given the complexity (13 parameters, output schema exists), the description is thorough: it covers purpose, checks, usage context, return format, and cost control. Everything an agent needs is present.
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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining how `verbose` and `max_words` control output size and token cost, which goes beyond the schema definitions.
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 clearly states the tool audits a fashion product page for SEO best practices, listing specific checks (meta title, description, JSON-LD, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling 'fashion_trend_analysis' by focusing on SEO audit, providing a specific verb+resource.
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 states 'Use this whenever a fashion brand wants to optimize a product listing for organic search' and notes it works for any e-commerce platform. Does not include exclusion criteria, but the guidance is clear and sufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
2 tool updates
v1.0.0- First observed
fashion_trend_analysis - First observed
product_seo_audit
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools serve entirely different purposes: one analyzes fashion trends, the other audits product SEO. There is no overlap or ambiguity.
Both tools use consistent snake_case naming with a clear pattern: fashion_trend_analysis and product_seo_audit. The naming is descriptive and predictable.
With only 2 tools, the server is undersized for its stated domain of e-commerce fashion market analysis. A typical server of this scope would need at least 5-10 tools to cover core functionalities like product data, competitor analysis, etc.
The server lacks essential tools for market analysis, such as product retrieval, competitor benchmarking, pricing data, or inventory insights. The trend analysis is limited to a few categories, and the SEO audit is a single-point check. Significant gaps prevent comprehensive market analysis.
Maintenance
Related MCP Connectors
- CalmSEOOAuthcom.calmseo
SEO MCP server for keyword research, SERP analysis, audits, and Search Console workflows.
- RampifyOAuthdev.rampify
SEO MCP server: crawl your site, find AI-visibility gaps, and ship the fix from your coding agent.
Hosted Amazon Seller and Vendor MCP server for Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, Codex, Gemini, Copilot.
MCP server for building and testing AI agents with multi-model experimentation and insights.
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseCqualityDmaintenanceA Cursor MCP server that analyzes web pages for SEO issues and validates structured data schemas within your codebase without requiring browser extensions.17-
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceA read-only MCP server that enables querying and introspection of any Gadget app via GraphQL. It allows users to list models, inspect fields, and fetch records directly within AI tools like Claude and Cursor.912 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceThe Vistoya MCP server gives AI agents direct access to a curated, multi-brand fashion catalog. Agents can search by structured filters, discover products through natural language, find similar items, and retrieve full product details — all over a single Streamable HTTP connection.7 npmMIT
- -licenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceSelf-hosted MCP server that provides web scraping and crawling tools, integrating seamlessly with AI frameworks like OpenAI Agents SDK, Cursor, and Claude Code.4-