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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description only has to add what the annotations cannot. It does that with two important caveats: "from/confirm prices are estimates. Not live stock." and the sold_elsewhere ordering exclusion. Minor gap: no mention of result caps or ordering, though the schema covers limit/offset.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and contents, then caveats, then routing. Every sentence carries information, though the first sentence is a dense list that runs long and could be split for scannability.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing return values and does so (categories, variants, prices, photos, availability, fulfilment modes), plus the estimation caveat and pagination pointer. For a 4-parameter read tool this is complete enough to call correctly.

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 75%, and the description fills the notable hole by specifying that "business" is an exact id or slug (that parameter has no schema description at all). It also clarifies query semantics ("words in its name or description") and confirms offset should be fed from page.next_offset, adding meaning beyond the raw integer bounds.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Read the owner-approved product list") plus the accepted identifiers ("exact business id or slug"), then enumerates what the payload contains: categories, products, options/variants with prices, photos, availability, pickup/delivery. That level of detail lets an agent distinguish it from estimate_order and request_order without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: read here, then "Use estimate_order, then request_order when the customer asks to order" and "sold_elsewhere products are bought on their own page (product_url), never ordered here." It also gives the trigger for the query parameter ("For one product or a long list") and the follow-up mechanic ("read more with page.next_offset").

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