Skip to main content
Glama
ncosic

Webotee Amazon Product Research

operator_compare

Read-only

Compare two sellers head-to-head on shared ASINs: see buy-box winner, price gap, and revenue-at-risk. Identify uncontested high-revenue ASINs each seller wins that the other doesn't carry.

Instructions

ASIN-level buy-box head-to-head between two operators (sellers). For the ASINs BOTH carry (contested), returns who holds the buy-box (winner), each operator's buy-box share, their sanitized average prices and the price gap, how many OTHER sellers are on the listing, whether Amazon holds the box, and a situation tag (amazon_in_box | reseller_swarm | tied_price | price_gap) — plus operator_a's estimated 30-day revenue-at-risk. Also returns each side's WHITESPACE: high-revenue ASINs that operator wins which the OTHER doesn't carry (expansion targets). Use when the user asks 'compare seller A vs seller B', 'where do these two sellers overlap / compete', 'who wins the buy-box between them', 'show me the head-to-head', or 'what does A sell that B doesn't'. Sortable by revenue-at-risk (default), price gap, or share gap.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
operator_aYesFirst operator/seller name (the focal seller — revenue-at-risk + situation are from A's view).
operator_bYesSecond operator/seller name.
marketplace_idNo1 = Amazon UK, 2 = Amazon US (default).
limitNoContested ASINs to return (default 25, max 100). This tool pages.
sortNoSort the contested list: revenue_at_risk (operator_a's 30d revenue at risk, default), price_gap (abs A-vs-B price gap), or share_gap (abs buy-box share gap).
min_est_revenue_30dNoOnly contested ASINs with estimated 30-day listing revenue >= this.
contested_onlyNoIf true, skip the whitespace sections (only the head-to-head contested list).
include_whitespaceNoInclude each side's whitespace ASINs (default true).
whitespace_forNoWhich side's whitespace to compute (default both).
brandNoOptional — scope the comparison to a single brand's ASINs (catalog sizes, contested, and whitespace are all limited to that brand). Omit for all brands.
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds comprehensive behavioral details: return fields like winner, shares, price gap, situation tag, revenue-at-risk, whitespace sections, sorting, and paging. No contradiction with annotations.

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 coherent paragraph that front-loads the core purpose, lists outputs, and gives usage examples. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, appropriate for the tool's complexity.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given no output schema and 10 parameters, the description thoroughly explains return fields, filtering, sorting, whitespace concept, and usage scenarios, making it complete for agent invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Even though schema coverage is 100%, the description adds significant context beyond the schema, e.g., 'operator_a is the focal seller — revenue-at-risk + situation are from A's view', and clarifies behavior of contested_only, include_whitespace, and sort enum values.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly states 'ASIN-level buy-box head-to-head between two operators (sellers).' The verb 'compare' and resource 'two operators' are explicit, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like operator_buybox_losses or operator_top_brands by focusing on head-to-head comparison.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Provides explicit user query examples such as 'compare seller A vs seller B' and 'who wins the buy-box between them', which give clear guidance on when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use or mention alternative tools.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/ncosic/webotee-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server