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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description explains that startingPrice is a floor whose unit basis varies by product and must not be compared or quoted as firm, with quote_product being the only authoritative source. This is valuable behavioral context absent from the schema, though it does not cover result ordering or pagination.

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?

The two-sentence description is dense but every clause carries meaning: the resource, the returned fields, the entry-point obligation, and the critical price caveat. It front-loads the core purpose before the warning.

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 search tool with only two simple parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential usage contract: what is returned, how to interpret the price, and how the tool fits into the workflow. No critical information is missing for a competent agent.

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% and both q and limit are already described in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource: full-text search in the Fulfiller catalog returning quotable products with a defined field list (productId, sku, url, prix d'appel). It distinguishes itself by declaring it the mandatory entry point on which all other tools rely, making it easy to separate from siblings like get_product_details or quote_product.

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?

It explicitly instructs that this tool must be used first, because other tools operate on the productId returned here. This is clear when-to-use guidance even without a direct search alternative among siblings, and it warns against treating startingPrice as final.

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