akakce-mcp

Akakçe price history

akakce_price_history

Returns a product's price-history chart as a PNG image URL from its Akakçe product code, so you can display past price trends without numeric data points.

Instructions

Bir ürünün fiyat geçmişi grafiğini döndürür. Akakçe geçmişi yalnızca hazır bir grafik GÖRSELİ (PNG) olarak sunar — sayısal veri noktası yoktur. Sonuçta grafiğin doğrudan görüntü URL'i döner (kullanıcıya gösterilebilir). Sadece ürün code'u yeterli.

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": "akakce_price_history"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	No	Ürün sayfası URL'i (opsiyonel).
`code`	No	Ürün kodu (akakce_search/autocomplete sonucundan).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Oct 24, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that the tool returns only a PNG chart with zero numeric data points and that the result is a directly viewable image URL. It omits auth/rate-limit or failure behavior, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core behavior and the critical image-only constraint, with no filler.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by explaining the return value (a direct chart image URL, no numeric series). For a simple two-parameter read tool that is nearly complete, with only auth/error context missing.

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 both parameters are already documented; the description only adds that the product `code` alone is sufficient (making `url` effectively redundant). That is a useful hint but not substantial beyond-schema meaning.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: returns a product's price-history chart. It implicitly distinguishes itself from price-data siblings (e.g. akakce_product_prices) by stressing that the history is only an image with no numeric data points, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

'Sadece ürün code'u yeterli' gives minimal usage context, and the image-only note implies when this is preferable to numeric price endpoints. But there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement and no named alternative for retrieving numeric history.

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