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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the qualifying condition (price drop measured between the two most recent price points), which is genuinely behavioral. However, it says nothing about result ordering, limits, or whether the list is capped, which matter for a listing tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

One front-loaded sentence that defines the filter without any filler or restatement of the tool name.

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 one-optional-param list tool with no output schema or annotations, the key ambiguity — what counts as 'recently reduced' — is resolved precisely. Only secondary details like ordering or result caps are absent.

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 the single optional `countries` parameter already documents its enum and default (CZ). The description adds no meaning beyond that, so 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?

States a specific resource (deals) with a precise quantitative filter — 1–40% drop between the two latest prices — so an agent knows exactly what set is returned. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_price_movers or list_hot_deals, leaving overlap to inference.

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 threshold definition implies when the tool applies, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no naming of alternatives such as get_price_movers or list_hot_deals, which a caller would need to disambiguate.

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