Skip to main content
Glama
sepehr071

digikala-mcp

by sepehr071
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Compare products

dk_compare
Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare 2-4 Digikala products side by side by price, rating, and differing specifications to choose between options; unknown product IDs are flagged.

Instructions

Compare 2-4 products side by side: price and rating, then the spec rows where they differ.

values in a specs row follow the order of products (null = no such spec); identical rows fold into same_specs. Best within one category. Unknown ids are listed in missing_ids.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
product_idsYes2-4 product ids of the same kind, e.g. [20109389, 20110013].

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.4.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / product_ids / title
      Removed value: -"Product Ids"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"dk_compareArguments"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "title": "dk_compareDictOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description adds substantive behavior beyond them: how missing/unknown ids surface (missing_ids), how identical spec rows collapse (same_specs), positional alignment of values to products with null meaning absent, and which side wins ties ('best within one category'). That is useful non-obvious context for an annotated read tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short, front-loaded lines with no filler; the core action comes first and the field-name semantics follow. Slightly telegraphic phrasing ('Best within one category') costs a little clarity but nothing is wasted.

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?

With no output schema, the description must carry the return contract, and it largely does: comparison shape, differing-row filtering, same_specs, missing_ids. It omits error behavior for invalid counts or mismatched product kinds, but a 1-parameter read-only tool is otherwise sufficiently covered.

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% and the single parameter is fully documented there, so baseline is 3. The description goes beyond the schema by explaining how the result relates back to the input ordering (`values` follows `products`, null = no such spec), which is semantics an agent needs to read the response correctly.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Compare 2-4 products side by side') plus the scope and the exact outputs it produces (price/rating, differing spec rows). No sibling tool does product-vs-product comparison, so the agent can distinguish it from dk_product, dk_search, or dk_shortlist at a glance.

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?

The description never states when to choose this over alternatives such as dk_product (single lookup) or dk_shortlist, nor any preconditions (all ids must be the same kind is only in the schema). Usage is inferable from the verb, but no explicit routing guidance is given.

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