duckduckgo_shopping

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly discloses two major limitations: no destination URL due to ad-click-tracking redirects, and only the first page is supported due to opaque pagination tokens. It also reveals the ad-funded nature of the results. This is exceptional transparency.

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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value: purpose, return fields, and critical limitations. There is no fluff or redundancy.

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 fully explains what is returned (title, brand, merchant, description, price, rating, review count, total page count) and any caveats (no URL, first page only). This is complete for a search tool with no schema.

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 input schema already provides clear descriptions for both parameters ('Search query' and 'DuckDuckGo market code, e.g. us-en, uk-en') with 100% coverage. The description does not add any additional parameter semantics, so it remains at 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 opens with 'Search DuckDuckGo shopping results,' which is a clear verb+resource statement. It distinguishes this tool from sibling search tools (duckduckgo_search, duckduckgo_image, etc.) by explicitly naming the shopping vertical and listing the normalized fields returned.

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 provides clear context on when to use this tool: when shopping results are needed. It also implicitly differentiates from organic search by stating that the shopping vertical is 'ad-funded, syndicated product listings, not organic content.' However, it does not explicitly name an alternative tool for organic results or state when not to use it.

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