Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Mostrador MCP

Mostrador MCP

by schbs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Precio con descuentos

precio
Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculates a product's final price by quantity and payment method, combining volume and payment discounts with a 15% cap and warning when stock is insufficient.

Instructions

Precio final de un producto para una cantidad y un medio de pago, con el detalle de las reglas: 5 % desde 10 unidades y 10 % desde 50; efectivo −10 %, transferencia −5 %, débito igual, crédito en 3 cuotas +10 %. Los descuentos se combinan con un tope de 15 %. Avisa si no alcanza el stock.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "sku": "<sku>",
      "cantidad": "<cantidad>",
      "medio_pago": "<medio_pago>"
    },
    "name": "precio"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
skuYesSKU del producto, por ejemplo ET-HM-0001 (lo devuelve buscar_producto)
cantidadYesUnidades (1 a 1000)
medio_pagoYesefectivo, transferencia, debito o credito_3_cuotas

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
skuYes
totalYes
nombreYes
cantidadYes
medio_pagoYes
subtotal_listaYes
stock_suficienteYes
descuento_total_pctYes
ajuste_medio_pago_pctYes
descuento_volumen_pctYes
precio_unitario_finalYes
precio_unitario_listaYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare a safe, idempotent, closed-world read, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior beyond them: the discount combination semantics and the 15% total cap, plus the fact that a response can include an insufficient-stock warning rather than failing — details an agent could not get from the annotations or schema.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core definition, then the rule table and the cap and the stock caveat. Every clause carries a distinct, actionable fact and there is no filler.

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?

For a three-parameter, fully documented read-only quote tool with an output schema, the description supplies everything an agent needs to call it correctly and to predict the pricing logic, including the header cap and the stock shortfall signal.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes further by stating the business effect of each input value: quantity tiers (5% from 10 units, 10% from 50) and per-payment-method adjustments (efectivo -10%, transferencia -5%, débito unchanged, crédito en 3 cuotas +10%). That mapping is meaning the enum and pattern in the schema do not convey. It stops short of explaining interactions per value (e.g. whether the cap applies before or after the payment adjustment) beyond the combined-cap note.

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 a precise resource and computation ("Precio final de un producto para una cantidad y un medio de pago") with the exact inputs that drive it, so an agent knows it is a price-quote tool, not a catalog or stock tool. It does not name or explicitly differentiate itself from the siblings buscar_producto and consultar_stock, only hinting at an internal stock check via "Avisa si no alcanza el stock", so it falls short of the sibling-routing bar for a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use / when-not-to-use guidance and no alternative tool is named, even though consultar_stock overlaps with the stock caveat mentioned here. The reader must infer that this tool is for quoting a final price rather than for looking up products or checking availability.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools