Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
asalbanoo-mcp

asalbanoo-mcp

by sepehr071
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Shop policies and FAQ

ab_shop_info
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read the shop's FAQ, terms, about, and contact pages as plain text to answer delivery, shipping, return, and location questions.

Instructions

Read one of the shop's policy pages as plain text: FAQ as question/answer pairs, other pages as text.

Use for "how long does delivery take", "do you ship with Tipax", "can I return it", "where is the shop".

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topicNo'faq' (delivery times, shipping, originality, wallet, returns), 'terms' (cancellation, returns, delivery rules), 'about' (the shop, branches), 'contact' (phone, address, hours).faq
full_textNoReturn the whole page text, not the first 8000 chars.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.3.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / full_text
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Return the whole page text, not the first 8000 chars.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / topic / title
      Removed value: -"Topic"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"ab_shop_infoArguments"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "title": "ab_shop_infoDictOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the full safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, non-destructive), so the description's added value is the disclosure that output shape varies by topic: FAQ comes back as Q/A pairs while other pages come back as text. That is genuine behavioral context beyond the annotations, though it says nothing about truncation or pagination behavior.

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 tight sentences, purpose front-loaded, and the example queries earn their place by directly aiding tool selection. No filler or redundancy.

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, so the description carries some return-value burden and does so partially by describing the FAQ-vs-text output shapes; the topic semantics live in the schema. For a simple read-only lookup tool this is nearly complete, with only the missing truncation/default behavior as a minor gap.

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% and the topic enum with per-value meanings plus the full_text truncation note are all in the schema, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no syntax or format detail about the parameters themselves, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 ('Read one of the shop's policy pages as plain text') and even specifies the return shape (FAQ as question/answer pairs, other pages as text). It is clearly distinct from the product/search-oriented siblings, but never names a sibling or explicitly contrasts scope, so it stops short of 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 Guidelines4/5

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

Gives concrete trigger phrases ('how long does delivery take', 'do you ship with Tipax', 'can I return it', 'where is the shop') that map cleanly to the enum topics, which is strong context for routing. It does not name an alternative tool or state when NOT to use it (e.g. product questions should go to ab_search), so it falls short of 5.

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