Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
goofish-cli

goofish-cli

by fancyboi999
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

item_view

浏览器视角查看商品详情（读取页面响应，含图片和卖家字段）

Instructions

浏览器视角查看商品详情（读取页面响应，含图片和卖家字段）

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": {
      "item_id": "<item_id>"
    },
    "name": "item_view"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
item_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.5.3
    • addedOutput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +true
    • removedOutput schema / properties
      Removed value: -{
-  "result": {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "title": "Result",
-    "type": "object"
-  }
-}
    • removedOutput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "result"
-]
    • changedOutput schema / title
      Previous value: -"item_viewOutput"New value: +"item_viewDictOutput"
  2. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It does disclose something useful beyond the name: the tool reads the live page response and returns image and seller fields. It says nothing about auth requirements, blocking/rate limits, failure modes when the page lacks the item, or whether the call is purely read-only.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

A single compact sentence with the retrieval mechanism and return content front-loaded in a parenthetical. No filler, though the parenthetical could be split into a clearer when-to-use statement.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not strictly required, and the description still names the notable payload fields. The critical missing piece is routing versus item_get in a sibling set that contains both, plus any note on browser-fetch fragility.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Only one parameter (item_id) with 0% schema description coverage; the description says nothing about its expected format (numeric ID, slug, or URL). The parameter name is largely self-explanatory, which prevents a lower score, but no format or validation guidance is added.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('查看商品详情') and adds a meaningful qualifier ('浏览器视角', reading the page response) that implies a distinct retrieval mechanism. However, it never names or distinguishes itself from the sibling item_get, which likely returns the same resource via another path, so the agent must guess between them.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

'浏览器视角' hints that this is browser-page-based rather than API-based, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative (item_get, search_items, item_list). The user must infer the choice from a two-character qualifier.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools