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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and the description adds a substantive behavioral contract: results are paged, nextCursor signals more results, and the caller must not claim list completeness when it is non-null. That is real agent-relevant context beyond the annotations, though nothing is said about rate limits or result ordering.

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?

Three tight sentences: purpose first, then the pagination/completeness rule, then sibling routing and the order boundary. No filler; every sentence carries a distinct instruction.

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 supplies the missing return-shape information (one page of up to limit products plus nextCursor) and the honesty constraint on reporting completeness. Nothing needed to invoke or interpret the result correctly is 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes further by tying limit to the page size and cursor to the previous page's nextCursor, establishing the pagination contract the schema only hints at. It adds meaning beyond the per-field descriptions rather than restating them.

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 ('Search the shop catalogue') plus the scope (phrase and optional category). It explicitly distinguishes itself from get_product ('for full details of one item'), so an agent can route correctly without opening either 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?

Names the sibling tool to use when full details of one item are needed and states the boundary 'does not place orders', which implicitly routes ordering to create_order. It stops short of an explicit when-not-to-search condition, but the alternative and boundary are clear.

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