aukro-mcp

Manage Watched Offers (Sledované nabídky)

aukro_watchlist

Idempotent

List, add, or remove Aukro.cz offers from your watchlist to track items you want to monitor; authentication is required.

Instructions

List watched offers (action: 'LIST'), add an offer to your watchlist (action: 'ADD'), or remove one or more offers from your watchlist (action: 'REMOVE'). 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_watchlist"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page`	No	0-indexed page number
`action`	No	Action to perform on watchlist	LIST
`offerId`	No	Offer ID to add (required when `action: 'ADD'`)
`offerIds`	No	Offer IDs to remove (required when `action: 'REMOVE'`)
`pageSize`	No	Items per page
`itemTypeFilter`	No	Filter watched items by offer type (for `LIST`)	ALL
`itemStateFilter`	No	Filter watched items by state (for `LIST`)	ACTIVE
`categoryIdFilter`	No	Optional category ID filter (for `LIST`)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the mutation profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true), so the bar is lower. The description adds the genuinely useful 'Requires authentication' constraint, but says nothing about scope effects such as whether REMOVE only detaches the watchlist entry versus affecting the offer, or how LIST paginates.

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 that pairs each operation with its action value, followed by the auth requirement. No filler, no repetition, and the most important routing information comes first.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For an 8-parameter, multi-mode tool with no output schema, the description covers the mode dispatch and the auth prerequisite, which is most of what an agent needs before calling. The missing piece is disambiguation from aukro_favourites and any statement about what LIST returns or how paging behaves.

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 every parameter is already documented, including which fields are conditional on action. The description only restates the action-to-parameter mapping (offerId for ADD, offerIds for REMOVE) that the schema already carries, adding no new semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific resource (watched offers) and enumerates the three concrete operations with their action values, so the agent knows exactly what the tool does. It falls short of a 5 because the closely related sibling aukro_favourites is never mentioned, leaving the agent to guess which of the two 'saved items' tools to use.

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?

Usage is implied by mapping each operation to its action value, and the authentication prerequisite is stated, which gives some when-to-use signal. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over aukro_favourites or aukro_my_bids_and_purchases, and no note on which filters apply only to LIST beyond what the schema already says.

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