within

Designer guide: facts, stock and stockists

designer_guide

Read-onlyIdempotent

Look up a designer or brand by name for sourced facts on founding, ownership and manufacturing, plus live boutique stock, prices, stockists, sizing and shopwithin.co pages.

Instructions

One designer or brand in one answer: who founded it, when, where it is from, who owns it and where it is made, each fact with its source; how many items independent luxury boutiques have in stock right now, which kinds, the price range, and how many are used, second hand or pre-owned; the boutiques that stock it and, with a city, the shops there that list it; the designer's own stores where known; how its sizes run; common questions; and its shopwithin.co pages. Use this when someone asks about a brand by name: who owns Chrome Hearts, where is Canada Goose made, does Supreme run big, Aime Leon Dore sizing, Lemaire locations. It only knows what shopwithin.co holds.

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": {
      "designer": "<designer>"
    },
    "name": "designer_guide"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`city`	No	A city, e.g. 'Toronto' or 'New York': adds the boutiques there that list the designer on their own sites. A place to shop, not the shopper's own location.
`designer`	Yes	The designer or brand: its name ('Chrome Hearts', 'Canada Goose') or its shopwithin.co slug ('chrome-hearts').

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	Yes
`about`	Yes
`found`	Yes
`pages`	Yes
`sizes`	Yes
`nearest`	Yes
`designer`	Yes
`in_stock`	Yes
`directory`	Yes
`questions`	Yes
`own_stores`	Yes
`directory_cities`	Yes
`boutiques_on_within`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.1Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds that facts are sourced ("each fact with its source") and that stock figures are live ("in stock right now"), which are behavioral details not in the annotations. The closed-world limit is reinforced in prose, though nothing is said about coverage gaps for unknown designers.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The purpose is front-loaded, but the first sentence is a very long enumeration of every returned section (founding facts, stock counts, used/pre-owned counts, stockists, own stores, sizing, FAQs, pages) that largely duplicates the output schema. The usage examples earn their place; the return-value inventory does not.

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?

With an output schema, full annotation coverage, and 100% parameter documentation, the description only needed to add retrieval intent, scope, and sourcing behavior — all of which it supplies. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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 both parameters are documented, so the baseline is 3; the description goes further by explaining the conditional effect of `city` — it adds the shops in that city that list the designer — which clarifies the behavioral consequence of an optional parameter rather than just its format.

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 pair: it returns a guide to one designer/brand covering founding facts, live boutique stock, stockists, own stores, sizing, FAQs and shopwithin.co pages. An agent can immediately distinguish this from piece-level tools like search_pieces or where_to_buy, since the unit of retrieval is the brand itself.

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 an explicit trigger ("Use this when someone asks about a brand by name") followed by four concrete example queries (who owns Chrome Hearts, where is Canada Goose made, does Supreme run big, Aime Leon Dore sizing) that map directly to the returned sections. It also states the boundary "It only knows what shopwithin.co holds", but names no alternative sibling for adjacent needs such as finding a specific item or checking a boutique.

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