within

Where to buy it

where_to_buy

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find independent luxury boutiques stocking a designer, named item, or style code, with live sizes, prices, and city stockists.

Instructions

Where to buy a designer, a named item or a style code. First the items in stock right now at independent luxury boutiques, each with the shop, the price, the sizes and the shopwithin.co page to buy it. Then, with a city, the boutiques there that list the designer on their own sites, with their streets. Then the designer's own stores where shopwithin.co holds a sourced answer. Use this when someone asks where to buy something, types a designer with 'store', or asks for stockists, authorized retailers or locations in a city: where to buy Chrome Hearts, Chrome Hearts store, Rick Owens in New York, Guidi stockists, Nike Mind slides. If nobody has it, the answer says so.

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "where_to_buy"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`city`	No	A city, e.g. 'Toronto' or 'Paris': stock from boutiques there, and the shops there that list the designer. A place to shop, not the shopper's own location.
`size`	No	A size that must be in stock, as a shop labels it: 'M', '42', 'US 9'.
`query`	Yes	What to find: a designer ('Guidi'), a named item ('Rick Owens Ramones', 'Nike Mind slides') or a style code ('GR02V').
`country`	No	A two-letter country code, e.g. 'US' or 'GB': only boutiques whose own delivery list names that country.
`designer`	No	The designer or brand, when the query names only the item.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	Yes
`exact`	Yes
`query`	Yes
`total`	Yes
`pieces`	Yes
`designer`	Yes
`view_url`	Yes
`directory`	Yes
`own_stores`	Yes
`directory_cities`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.1Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior: ordered result tiers, inclusion of price/sizes/shop page, and the negative case ("If nobody has it, the answer says so"). It does not discuss result limits, ranking, or freshness of stock, which leaves real gaps for a tool whose core promise is 'in stock right now'.

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 purpose, then results, then usage triggers, then examples, so an agent can stop reading early. Some clauses are padded ("each with the shop, the price, the sizes and the shopwithin.co page to buy it") and the brand name is repeated in examples more than needed.

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 an output schema present the description needn't explain return fields, and it correctly focuses on purpose, triggers, and failure behavior. The remaining gap is operational: no hint about how many results, whether stock is filtered by size/country when both are supplied, or how partial matches behave.

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%, so the baseline is 3, and the description earns a step up by explaining what the city parameter changes in the output (boutiques there that list the designer, with streets). It still doesn't clarify how query, designer, size, and country interact when combined, and the designer-vs-query split is left to the schema.

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 ("Where to buy a designer, a named item or a style code") and then spells out the three result tiers, so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It is clearly distinct from lookup siblings like search_pieces or boutique_directory because it returns buy-locations rather than catalog rows.

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 explicit trigger conditions: asks where to buy something, a designer plus 'store', or requests for stockists, authorized retailers, or city locations, backed by four concrete example queries. It does not name an alternative tool or state when not to use it, which keeps it short of a 5.

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