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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the bar is lower, and the description still adds real context beyond them: it discloses that no Associates tag is fabricated and that trackingTag comes back null until configured — a non-obvious output behavior. It stops short of describing any failure or fallback behavior when resolution fails.

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?

Two dense sentences with the accepted inputs and the required-parameter constraint front-loaded; nothing is padded. The trailing 'OpenAPI: resolveProduct' is mildly cryptic but cheap.

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 an 8-parameter, no-output-schema read tool, the core resolve path is covered adequately, but the apartment-search branch and its three unexplained parameters leave an agent unable to invoke that mode confidently. The trackingTag note partly compensates by explaining an otherwise surprising return value.

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 63%, so the schema carries most of the load and baseline 3 applies. The description reinforces marketplace/locale as mandatory and explains that keywords are a fallback when no ASIN exists, but moveType, roomFocus and budgetBand — three of the eight params, presumably tied to the 'apartment search' mode — get zero explanation anywhere.

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 (resolve) and the exact input forms it accepts (ASIN, pasted /dp/ URL, keywords) plus the output (buyUrl), which is far more than the title conveys. It does not name any sibling, but the siblings are all kit-management tools that are obviously unrelated, so disambiguation is not needed.

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?

'ALWAYS pass marketplace + locale' is a concrete usage directive, and the '(product /dp or apartment search)' parenthetical implies two modes. However, it never says which of url/asin/keywords takes precedence when several are supplied, and it gives no guidance on when to use this rather than e.g. get_catalog for lookups.

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