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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds useful behavioral detail: one page of up to 60 normalized results, US/USD prices, page indexing, and which filters affect the result set. It does not discuss rate limits or error behavior, but it supplements the annotations well.

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 front-loaded with the core action and return shape, then covers parameter usage in a second sentence. It is dense and somewhat repetitive of the schema and output schema, but it avoids fluff and remains readable.

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 9 parameters, full schema description coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description provides everything needed to call the tool correctly: purpose, required keyword input, pagination, sort values, price currency, filters, and attr provenance from aliexpress_search_filters.

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%, so the schema already documents all 9 parameters in detail. The description restates q, page, sort, price, free_shipping, choice, and attr behavior, but adds little beyond the schema's own examples and explanations.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: search AliExpress's public keyword catalog and return product results. It is clear what the tool does, and the mention of 'keyword catalog' helps distinguish it from category browsing, but it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives such as aliexpress_category_products.

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?

It explains how to use the required q parameter and how optional sort, price, shipping, choice, and attr filters narrow results. The context is clear, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over sibling tools like aliexpress_category_products or aliexpress_suggest.

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