search_grocery_products

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses a read-only search over a public catalog and says the output is ranked direct product links, though it doesn't detail error handling or rate limits.

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: one lead sentence followed by a clear Args block. Each parameter gets a brief, useful explanation with no redundant or filler content.

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?

With an output schema present and all parameters documented, the description covers everything needed to invoke the tool. It also references find_grocery_retailers for location_id, completing the workflow context.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, but the description manually documents all five parameters with concrete values and examples. It fully compensates by explaining retailer options, query examples, limit bounds, and brand optionality.

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 clearly states the tool searches one retailer's public catalog and returns ranked product links. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like find_grocery_retailers and the handoff/template creation tools.

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 specifies single-retailer product search and notes that location_id comes from find_grocery_retailers, providing useful context. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool or alternative options for multi-retailer searches.

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