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

Beyond the read-only annotations, the description adds a critical behavioral constraint: export prices are only on request and must never be estimated or invented. It also specifies FOB Brazil and the product/container scope, though it does not describe return format or whether offers change over time.

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 description is front-loaded with the core purpose, then product categories, trade term, and pricing constraint. Every sentence carries useful information, and there is no redundant wording.

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 zero-parameter, read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers the company, product offerings, container formats, Incoterm, and the no-price-estimation rule. It does not explicitly describe the returned list structure, but the essential calling context is present.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately does not invent parameter details and instead explains the offer scope and pricing policy.

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 resource: current export offers and FullSets from Unan Trading Ltda, including named product categories and container types. It is clear what the tool lists, but it does not explicitly distinguish this browsing tool from siblings like search_products or get_fullset_beef_quote.

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?

Usage is implied: the tool is for importers worldwide to view current offers, and pricing must go through a request rather than being estimated. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus request_quotation, get_fullset_beef_quote, or search_products.

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