mcp-costco

search_products

Search Costco products by name, category, or brand with filters for price, sorting, and result limits to find specific items.

Instructions

Search Costco products by name, category, or brand

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search_products"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`query`	Yes	Search term (product name, brand, category)
`category`	No	Category filter (e.g., 'electronics', 'grocery', 'furniture')
`min_price`	No	Minimum price filter
`max_price`	No	Maximum price filter
`sort_by`	No	Sort order (default: relevance)
`limit`	No	Maximum number of results (default: 10, max: 24)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Mar 11, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the search functionality but lacks critical details: whether it's read-only (implied but not explicit), pagination behavior (only 'limit' parameter hints at it), rate limits, authentication requirements, or error handling. For a search tool with 6 parameters, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its operational behavior.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose ('Search Costco products') and specifies search dimensions without unnecessary elaboration. Every element earns its place, making it easy to parse quickly.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity (6 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks information on return values (e.g., result format, fields included), error conditions, authentication needs, and usage context relative to siblings. For a search tool in an e-commerce environment, this leaves the agent under-informed about how to effectively use it.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all 6 parameters with descriptions and enum values. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only mentioning 'name, category, or brand' which partially maps to the 'query' parameter. It doesn't explain parameter interactions (e.g., how 'query' and 'category' combine) or provide examples, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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?

The description clearly states the verb ('Search') and resource ('Costco products'), specifying searchable attributes ('by name, category, or brand'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_product_details' (specific product lookup) and 'check_warehouse_stock' (inventory check). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from potential overlapping tools like 'view_cart' (browsing vs. searching).

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., whether login is required), compare to siblings like 'get_product_details' (for specific product info) or 'view_cart' (for browsing cart items), or specify use cases like exploratory shopping versus targeted lookups.

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

Deploy Server