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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds that trackingTag is null until enrollment, which tells the agent the return may lack affiliate tagging. It does not cover precedence when multiple inputs are supplied or any failure/rate-limit behavior.

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?

One dense sentence plus a hard requirement and an API alias reference; no filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded before the constraints.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers the primary return field but leaves the gift-context parameters and input precedence unexplained. The critical invocation requirements (marketplace + locale) are stated, so an agent can call it correctly, but not optimally.

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%; the description clarifies the accepted URL shape (/dp/) beyond the schema's generic "Pasted Amazon product URL", and maps url/asin/keywords to input modes. However the three gift-context parameters (occasion, budgetBand, giftCategory) have no description in either place and their effect on resolution is unstated.

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) plus the three accepted input forms (ASIN, pasted /dp/ URL, keywords) and the output (buyUrl). This is clearly distinct from siblings like search_gifts or create_wishlist, though it never names them explicitly.

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" gives a hard usage rule, but there is no guidance on when to prefer this over search_gifts or list_marketplaces, and no exclusions. Usage is only implied by the input modalities.

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