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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses important marketplace resolution and fallback behavior, but omits default limit/ordering, auth requirements, and other operational details for an eight-parameter listing tool.

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 compact and front-loaded, starting with the core list operation before marketplace mapping. The marketplace/tag details are dense but directly useful, with little wasted text.

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?

Given eight parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description should do more. It explains marketplace selection and filters but leaves limit behavior and return ordering/pagination unstated.

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 38%, so the description must compensate. It covers q, goal, level, budgetBand, and marketplace resolution, but leaves limit unexplained and does not clarify enum meanings.

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: "List hand-picked catalog products with /dp/ buy links." It also clarifies the two marketplace catalogs, but does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings such as search_gear.

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 description implies usage through filters and marketplace behavior, but never states when to use this tool instead of search_gear or resolve_product. No exclusions or alternatives are given.

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