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

Beyond readOnlyHint/openWorldHint, it discloses the data source and that it comes via a residential proxy, the pagination ceiling, and a precise cost model ($0.02 USDC per successful call via x402 on Base/Solana/Arc, failed calls not charged). That is exactly the operational context annotations cannot carry.

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?

A single semicolon-delimited sentence that front-loads the resource and examples before moving to pagination and pricing. Dense but every clause (fields, paging, price, source) carries information; slightly heavy as one sentence.

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?

Covers scope, input format, page limits, data provenance, and billing, and an output schema exists so return-shape explanation is a bonus rather than a gap. An agent has everything needed to call this correctly and predict the cost.

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 both parameters are already documented with the same slug examples. The description only adds the 48-per-page detail, which is marginal beyond the schema's 'page 1 to 20' note — baseline 3.

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 (DICK'S Sporting Goods products in a category) with concrete category examples and enumerates the returned fields. An agent can tell this is a product-catalog scraper, distinct from the ESPN/stats-oriented siblings.

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?

Gives clear invocation context: category slug format matching dickssportinggoods.com/f/<slug>, page range 1–20, 48 items per page. It does not explicitly name when to prefer a sibling (e.g. dev_academy_sports_outdoors for a different retailer), so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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