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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose an important behavioral trait — results come from a public catalog feed and are not checkout prices — but says nothing about pagination, result limits, auth/agentId requirements, or the shape of the response.

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 English sentence is front-loaded and efficient, but the Dutch restatement repeats the same content verbatim in a second language, roughly doubling length without adding information for most agents.

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?

No annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage mean the description should explain the call contract; it leaves agentId (required) and store undefined and gives no hint of result shape or limits. Only the pricing caveat is genuinely additive.

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 coverage is 0% for three parameters, so the description must compensate. Instead it describes 'category, brand and a short text', which do not correspond to the actual schema (only query, store, agentId) — this actively misleads about available filters, and store and agentId are never explained.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Search or list products from the public catalog feed', and the caveat 'Discovery only, not the checkout price' separates it from checkout/pricing flows. It does not name a sibling tool (e.g. gnv_product for detail lookups), so it stops short of full disambiguation.

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?

'Discovery only, not the checkout price' implies the usage window (browse before buying), but there is no explicit when-to-use vs. gnv_product/gnv_knowledge_search guidance and no stated prerequisites such as a required agentId.

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