Fetch products from a Product Hunt collection in curator order, with paging beyond the first 20 and up to 250 items per request.
Products of a Product Hunt collection in the curator's order, with the full list paged beyond the first 20. 1 point per returned record.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| max_items | No | Max items (up to 250) | |
| collection | Yes | Collection slug or Product Hunt URL. e.g. 0-design-tools | |
| start_page | No | Starting page |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose real behavior: results come back in curator order, pagination extends past the first 20, and there is a cost of '1 point per returned record.' That pricing and ordering context is genuinely useful, but there is nothing about pagination limits, rate limits, or record shape.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with what is returned before the paging and cost notes. Every clause carries information; only the terse '1 point per returned record' fragment reads a bit clipped.
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?
There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must do more work, yet it only sketches the return set ('products ... in curator's order') without describing record fields or output shape. It is adequate for a list endpoint but not fully self-sufficient.
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 description coverage is 100%, so collection, max_items and start_page are already documented in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning about parameter usage (e.g. how start_page interacts with the 'first 20', or that collection accepts a URL slug), so the baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a concrete verb+resource: returns the products belonging to a Product Hunt collection, in the curator's order. This is specific enough to be actionable, but it never distinguishes itself from the sibling run_producthunt_collections_search, so an agent can't tell the two apart from the description alone.
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 phrase 'with the full list paged beyond the first 20' hints that this tool is for paginating the complete list, which implies usage, but no when-to-use statement or alternative (e.g. the collections_search sibling) is named. No prerequisites, no exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.