상품 가격 비교

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds that the output is a comparison table including price range and representative mall, giving useful behavioral context without contradicting annotations.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and outcome. The first sentence explains the functionality and the second gives a clear usage example. No wasteful repetition of schema details.

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 description explains the tool's purpose, usage, and output structure (comparison table with specific elements). Annotations cover safety, and schema covers parameters. It lacks only nuances like pagination or edge cases, but for a read-only comparison tool, it is sufficiently complete.

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%, with each parameter (queries, sort, perQuery) having its own description. The tool description does not add extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, which is the baseline of 3.

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 explicitly states the tool searches multiple candidate queries (2-5) and displays a comparison table of lowest price, price range, and representative shopping mall. This distinctively separates it from sibling tools like search_products (single search) or shopping_trends, satisfying 'specific verb+resource+scope'.

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 clearly instructs to use for structured comparisons like 'A vs B', providing concrete usage context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the comparison use case is sufficiently clear and differentiates from siblings.

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