chrono24_dealer

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does well by specifying that this is a public storefront page and listing the returned fields, including that inventory is shaped like chrono24-search results. It does not mention error cases, rate limits, or inventory pagination, but for a simple read-oriented fetch the disclosed behavior is reasonably complete.

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 two sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, followed by a compact list of returned content and the key input-origin note. Every clause earns its place.

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?

Without an output schema, the description compensates by listing the main return fields and the inventory shape. It also explains the input provenance. Minor gaps remain around pagination of the inventory list and exact formatting of the rating, but the tool is adequately specified 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?

The schema already documents slug as 'Dealer slug from a listing's seller link' with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining how to locate the slug in search/listing results and why no discovery endpoint exists, going beyond the schema's minimal parameter description.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get a Chrono24 dealer's storefront.' It then enumerates exactly what the storefront contains (business description, trust badge, rating, review count, lifetime watches-sold count, current inventory), making the tool's function unmistakable and distinct from generic search or listing 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?

The description clearly explains where the slug comes from ('found in a chrono24-search or chrono24-listing result's seller link') and explicitly states there is no dealer-discovery endpoint. This gives an agent actionable guidance on how to obtain the required input and when this tool is appropriate, though it does not explicitly contrast with the sibling chrono24_dealer_reviews.

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