bonhams_auction_lots

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden. It discloses that data is credential-free (no auth required) and that output is 'normalized', which is useful. However, it does not mention pagination behavior, error handling, or rate limits, which would be helpful for an API-backed tool.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a concise note on filters and data source. No unnecessary words or repetition. Very efficient.

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 a listing tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it lists, the filters, and the data source. It could be more explicit about the return structure (e.g., that it returns an array of lots with details), but the mention of 'normalized lot listing' provides some clarity. Overall, it is adequate for an agent to call it correctly.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds a little context by mentioning department and free-text query filters, but does not add extra meaning beyond the schema descriptions for page and per_page. It does not compensate for the high coverage with additional nuance.

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 action (List the lots), the resource (a Bonhams auction), and the scope (one specific auction). It also mentions optional filters (department, free-text query), which distinguishes it from broader search tools like bonhams_lot_search or bonhams_auction_search.

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 implies usage: when you have a specific auction id and want its lots, with optional filtering. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context of 'one Bonhams auction' and the presence of sibling search tools gives clear guidance.

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