Create Offer

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

The description discloses the asynchronous nature ('Returns a process status — the offer is created asynchronously') and the follow-up action. Annotations provide basic hints but no contradiction; this adds significant behavioral context beyond 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?

Three well-structured sentences: purpose, requirements+async note, and follow-up. No redundancy; concise and front-loaded.

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 the complexity (9 params, nested objects, async, no output schema), the description covers the key action, prerequisites, and async flow. It could mention the process status structure or error responses, but it's sufficient for use.

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 100%, so description adds limited value. It reiterates required fields and highlights the bundle price rule (quantity 1). This is useful but does not delve into parameter format or constraints beyond the schema.

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 'Create a new offer on bol.com' and lists essential requirements (EAN, condition, pricing, stock, fulfilment), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling tools like update_offer or delete_offer by specifying creation.

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?

The description explains when to use (creating an offer) and what prerequisites are needed, plus directs to get_process_status for checking completion. It implicitly contrasts with update/delete siblings, but lacks explicit 'when not to use' guidance.

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