Retrieve your frequently purchased products ranked by purchase frequency from your logged-in Migros account to reorder staples and review buying habits.
Your frequently bought products, by how often you buy them. Requires login.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the authentication requirement, which is real behavioral context an agent must know before calling. It does not describe pagination, whether results are truncated, or how 'frequently bought' is computed or windowed, leaving notable gaps for an annotation-free tool.
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 short sentences with zero padding, and the core purpose is front-loaded ahead of the login prerequisite. Every clause earns its place.
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?
An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required, and the login requirement is covered. The omission of the sole parameter's meaning and default is the main remaining gap for an otherwise simple single-parameter read tool.
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?
The single parameter 'limit' has 0% schema description coverage and defaults to 30, yet the description never mentions it — no meaning, no default restatement, no upper bound, no note on how it interacts with frequency ranking. With essentially no schema documentation, the description should have compensated and does not.
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 the resource ('your frequently bought products') and the ordering principle ('by how often you buy them'), which distinguishes it from sibling product tools like new_products, home_products, and favourites. The retrieval verb is only implied, but the resource plus ordering makes the function unambiguous.
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?
The prerequisite 'Requires login' is a useful gating condition, and the frequency ordering hints at why an agent would pick this over a generic product listing. However, no alternative is named and there is no explicit when-not guidance against siblings such as favourites or my_orders.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.