homedepot_product_questions

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 reveals important non-obvious behavior: pagination is limited to the first 8 questions, the total Q&A count is included, and a product with no Q&A returns a genuine zero-result response rather than an error. This is meaningful context beyond the tool name and 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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value: what is returned, page size, total count, parameter meaning, and edge-case behavior. There is no filler or repetition.

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?

This is a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, and the description covers the essential context: purpose, return scope, parameter, and a notable edge case. It is slightly incomplete regarding the exact shape of each Q&A entry and how to access subsequent pages, but it is strong for a tool of this complexity.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the description's statement that 'id is the numeric product/internet id' mostly duplicates what the schema already says, including the example. Since the schema fully documents the parameter, the description adds little new semantic value beyond confirming what id refers to.

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 uses a specific verb ('Returns') and clearly identifies the resource: Home Depot product customer questions and answers, including the first page of 8 questions and the total Q&A count. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like homedepot_product, homedepot_search, and homedepot_category, all of which serve different purposes.

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 indicates this tool is for retrieving product Q&A, so when to use it is implied rather than explicit. However, it does not name alternatives or state when not to use it, such as distinguishing it from homedepot_product for product details or from review tools.

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