grailed_designers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool 'Returns a page' (paginated), that q is typo-tolerant and supports partial names for typeahead, and that an empty q lists the full taxonomy ordered by Grailed's default ranking (most-listed designers first). It also gives a data freshness snapshot (7,363 designers as of 2026-09-09). These are useful behavioral details beyond the schema.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the purpose, then explains the return value, the q behavior, and the default ordering. Every sentence contributes to the agent's understanding without 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?

There is no output schema, so the description should clarify what is returned. It says 'Returns a page... taxonomy' and implies the return values are names (the value space accepts 'by name'), which is sufficient for a simple listing. It does not describe the exact output structure (e.g., fields) but the core purpose, parameter behavior, and pagination are covered.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds significant meaning to q, detailing it as a free-text filter with typo tolerance and typeahead-style lookup, and explains the empty-q case. It does not add to page/limit beyond the schema's defaults and maximums, but the enrichment of q is valuable.

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's function: 'List or search Grailed's designer/brand taxonomy.' It also specifies the resource and its scope, and differentiates it by noting it is the value space accepted by grailed-search/grailed-sold-listings' designer parameter. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like grailed_search or grailed_categories.

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 when to use this tool by stating it provides the value space for the designer parameter in grailed-search/grailed-sold-listings players. It also explains the behavior of q (optional filter vs. full listing) and the ordering, giving clear usage context. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is strong enough.

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