within

What is trending this week

trending_now

Read-onlyIdempotent

Identify the designer items trending at independent boutiques this week, ranked with reasons, prior rank and weeks listed. Filter by women or men and by item kind.

Instructions

within's chart of the designer items trending at independent boutiques this week, updated daily: the ten leading items in order, each with its reason (Google searches, Pinterest searches, what boutiques worldwide are stocking, what people look at on within), its place last week and its weeks on the list, plus the designers of the week. Use this when someone asks what is trending in designer or luxury fashion right now, which designers, sneakers or bags are popular this week, or what is trending in one kind of item (sneakers, bags, jackets, boots, jewelry). dept narrows to women or men; kind to one kind of item. Each item has a url to buy it. It covers this week, not past years, and not mass market stores.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "trending_now"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`dept`	No	The women's or the men's chart; leave out for everyone's.
`kind`	No	One kind of piece, e.g. 'sneakers', 'bags', 'jackets', 'boots', 'jewelry', 'dresses'.
`limit`	No	How many places to return, up to ten, default 10.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes
`json`	Yes
`week`	Yes
`as_of`	Yes
`items`	Yes
`kinds`	Yes
`title`	Yes
`designers`	Yes
`past_weeks`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.1Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=true, idempotent=true, openWorld=false, destructive=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavior beyond them: the chart is refreshed daily, returns ranked positions with reason, last week's place, weeks on the list, designers of the week, and a buy URL per item. It does not discuss caching, cost, or how stale the chart can be within a day, which keeps it off a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the core definition and scope, and every clause carries information. It is one dense run-on, though, and the item-kind list ('sneakers, bags, jackets, boots, jewelry') is effectively enumerated twice — once in the usage trigger and again in the dept/kind note — costing some tightness.

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 read-only, three-optional-param tool with an output schema and full annotations, nothing an agent needs is missing: scope (this week, independent boutiques), ranking, per-item fields, and the meaning of each filter are all stated. The description even over-delivers relative to the existing output schema.

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 both enums are spelled out, so the description's 'dept narrows to women or men; kind to one kind of item' mostly restates the schema. `limit` (1-10, default 10) is not addressed at all in the description. Baseline 3 for a fully documented schema is correct here.

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?

Names a specific resource and shape: 'within's chart of the designer items trending at independent boutiques this week, updated daily' with 'the ten leading items in order'. That is unmistakably distinct from list-oriented siblings like new_arrivals, on_sale or search_pieces, since it is a curated weekly chart over independent boutiques, not a catalog query.

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 use trigger with several phrasings ('what is trending in designer or luxury fashion right now', 'which designers, sneakers or bags are popular this week') plus exclusions ('covers this week, not past years, and not mass market stores'). It stops short of naming a sibling to route to when the user actually wants new products or past seasons, so the alternative-routing half of a 5 is missing.

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