ecwid_search_customersSearch / list the store's customers with optional filters (keyword, email, name, customer group). Returns a paged collection. Ecwid REST: GET /customers.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | Filter by customer name. | |
| No | Filter by customer email. | ||
| limit | No | Max results per page (1-100). | |
| offset | No | Pagination offset. | |
| keyword | No | Full-text search term (name, email…). | |
| customer_group_id | No | Filter by customer group id. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates the safe, non-mutating nature of the call. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by stating that the result is a paged collection and by exposing the underlying Ecwid REST endpoint, which goes beyond the annotation.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three short sentences deliver the action, filters, return shape, and underlying endpoint with no filler. The most important information is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a read-only, zero-required-parameter listing tool with fully documented parameters, the description is largely complete: it names the resource, filters, pagination, and endpoint. It could be slightly stronger by noting the relationship to ecwid_get_customer, but nothing essential to invoking it correctly is missing.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter. The description's mention of keyword, email, name, and customer group mirrors the schema without adding new semantic detail, so it meets the baseline but does not elevate it.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states a specific action ('Search / list') and resource ('the store's customers'), and names the optional filter dimensions. It does not explicitly contrast with ecwid_get_customer, so it falls short of the strongest sibling-differentiation level.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description establishes when to use the tool: when searching or listing customers with filters. However, it does not explicitly say when not to use it or point to alternatives such as ecwid_get_customer for a single customer, so usage guidance remains implied rather than explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource-action pair (e.g., get by ID vs. search/list, adjust inventory vs. update order). The prefix `ecwid_` plus verb-noun structure makes boundaries clear, and no two tools appear to perform the same task.
All tools follow the `ecwid_<verb>_<resource>` pattern with verbs like get, list, search, adjust, update. The naming is uniform and predictable, with no mixed conventions or vague verbs.
12 tools is within the ideal range for a domain-specific API covering products, categories, customers, orders, coupons, and store profile. Each tool has a clear purpose and the set is well-scoped without redundancy.
The set covers read operations well but lacks create/update/delete for most resources (products, categories, customers, coupons). Only inventory adjustment and order status update are provided as mutations, leaving significant gaps in lifecycle management that an agent would likely need.