aukro-mcp

Manage Favorite Sellers & Saved Searches

aukro_favourites

Idempotent

Manage favorite sellers and saved searches by listing, adding, or removing entries; use it to organize marketplace preferences and requires authentication.

Instructions

List, add, or remove favorite sellers (LIST_SELLERS, ADD_SELLER, REMOVE_SELLERS) and saved searches (LIST_SEARCHES, REMOVE_SEARCHES). Requires authentication.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "aukro_favourites"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page`	No	0-indexed page number
`action`	No	Operation to perform	LIST_SELLERS
`pageSize`	No	Items per page
`sellerId`	No	Numeric seller userId (for `ADD_SELLER`)
`searchIds`	No	Saved search IDs to delete (for `REMOVE_SEARCHES`)
`sellerIds`	No	Numeric seller userIds to remove (for `REMOVE_SELLERS`)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true; the description adds the authentication requirement, which is real value beyond the structured fields. It does not disclose whether removals are permanent or reversible, nor how pagination behaves across the different actions. It does not contradict the annotations — 'remove' operations are consistent with readOnlyHint=false.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence plus a short prerequisite clause; every element earns its place and nothing is padded.

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?

For a six-parameter, multi-action tool with no output schema, the description covers the action surface and auth requirement but says nothing about what listings return (seller names? search queries?) or how page/pageSize apply per action. Adequate to invoke, thin for interpreting results.

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%, and the schema itself maps sellerId/sellerIds/searchIds to their specific actions, so the description need not repeat it. The description's action list mirrors the enum without adding per-action constraints or noting that non-applicable parameters should be omitted. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the parameter burden.

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 names specific verbs (list, add, remove) and two concrete resources (favorite sellers, saved searches), and enumerates the action tokens that drive the tool. It is unambiguous about scope, though it never names a sibling (e.g. watchlist, my_account) to draw the boundary against.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The only usage guidance is the precondition 'Requires authentication', which is genuinely useful. There is no statement of when to prefer this over siblings like aukro_watchlist or aukro_my_account, and no note that the action parameter selects mutually exclusive behaviors.

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