Retrieve complete hardware component details, including technical specifications, store prices with PIX and regular payment options, and the lowest available price.
Detalhes completos de um componente: especificações técnicas, preços por loja (PIX e normal), menor preço
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | URL do componente (ex: '/peca/W6UIQZ/processador-amd-ryzen-7-5800x3d' ou URL completa) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the output content but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, required authentication, or rate limits.
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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the purpose without any wasted words.
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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers the core functionality. Minor missing details like error handling or pagination are not critical here.
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% and the description does not add additional meaning beyond the existing parameter description for 'url'. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 it provides complete details of a component including technical specifications and prices. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_components (which lists multiple) and search_components (which searches).
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 description implies usage for getting details on a single component, but does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives or when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.