Skip to main content
Glama
sepehr071

technolife-mcp

by sepehr071
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Shop reviews

tl_shop_reviews
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read customer reviews of the Technolife shop's service and delivery, newest first, with 1–5 ratings and staff replies. Use it to judge the shop, not a product.

Instructions

Read customer reviews of the Technolife shop itself (service, delivery), newest first, rating 1-5, with staff replies.

Use to judge the shop rather than a product (for a product use tl_reviews). Dates are Jalali; the newest reviews on the site may be a few years old.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoZero-based page number, newest first.
limitNoReviews per page.
full_textNoReturn review and reply text uncut (default cuts at 400 characters).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv0.3.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / full_text
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Return review and reply text uncut (default cuts at 400 characters).",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / limit / title
      Removed value: -"Limit"
    • removedInput schema / properties / page / title
      Removed value: -"Page"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"tl_shop_reviewsArguments"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "title": "tl_shop_reviewsDictOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds genuinely non-obvious operational context the annotations don't carry: dates are Jalali and the newest reviews on the site may be several years old, which materially affects how an agent interprets freshness.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and scope, with the routing rule and the data-freshness caveat packed in without any filler. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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 must carry return-shape information; it does so partially by stating ratings 1-5 and staff replies, but it doesn't describe the review record structure or pagination behavior. For a three-optional-parameter read tool with full annotations, this is nearly complete.

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 page, limit and full_text (including the 400-character cut behavior) are already documented in the schema. The description adds 'newest first' but no additional parameter syntax or meaning beyond that, matching the baseline for fully-covered schemas.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource — reading customer reviews of the shop itself, covering service and delivery — plus return ordering (newest first) and content (rating 1-5, staff replies). It explicitly separates this from the product-review sibling by naming tl_reviews, so an agent can choose without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives an explicit selection rule: 'Use to judge the shop rather than a product (for a product use tl_reviews)'. That names the alternative and the condition that routes to it, which is exactly what the sibling-collision with tl_reviews requires.

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