Find the best current deals in a product category.
Searches for discounted, on-sale, or best-value products.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| budget | No | Optional budget limit, e.g. '£100', '$50' | |
| category | Yes | Product category, e.g. 'headphones', 'running shoes', 'coffee machines' | |
| session_id | No | Optional session identifier to link tool calls in one conversation. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It describes what the tool does ('searches for discounted, on-sale, or best-value products'), which communicates core behavior. However, it does not mention ordering, how 'best' is determined, whether budget is enforced, or any potential side effects. Given it's a read-only search, this level is acceptable but has room for more detail.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action ('Find the best current deals'), and provides a brief clarifying detail about the type of deals. Every sentence earns its place with no fluff, making it highly concise.
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?
The tool has a simple purpose, a provided output schema, and full param coverage in the schema. The description conveys the essential intent and selection criteria. It doesn't need to explain return values due to the output schema. Slight gap: no mention of how results are ranked, but overall it's complete for a straightforward search tool.
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% because all parameters (category, budget, session_id) have descriptions in the schema. The tool description itself does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond mentioning 'category', so the baseline of 3 applies. It does not compensate beyond what the schema already provides.
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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Find the best current deals in a product category.' It uses a specific verb ('find') with a resource ('deals') and scope ('category'). This distinguishes it from siblings like search_products (general search) and compare_prices (price comparison).
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 context is implied: use this tool when looking for discounted or best-value products in a category. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives to consider, such as search_products for non-deal searches. The description lacks exclusionary or comparative statements.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
The tools are mostly distinct: search_products and find_deals overlap somewhat (both search), and compare_prices overlaps with search_products in returning comparison data, but the descriptions clarify the different intents. The checkout lifecycle tools are clearly separated.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (check_order, compare_prices, complete_purchase, find_deals, search_products, start_checkout, update_checkout_info). No mixed conventions or vague verbs.
Seven tools is well-scoped for a shopping assistant covering search, deals, comparison, and the full checkout flow. Each tool earns its place without redundancy.
The toolset covers the core shopping lifecycle: discovery (search, deals, compare), checkout (start, update, complete), and order status (check). Minor gaps exist such as no explicit cancel checkout or detailed order retrieval, but agents can work around these.
