playstation_search

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses credential-free access, pagination behavior, and regional/language parameters (cc, l). Missing information on rate limits, data freshness, or error handling.

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 efficient sentences: first states purpose and output contents, second explains parameters and auth. No redundant or confusing information.

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?

Given no output schema, the description covers return contents (concepts/products, price, platforms, classification, media) and pagination. Lacks default sort, filtering beyond term, and expected data format, but acceptable for a simple search tool.

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%, but description adds functional meaning: cc selects region and currency, l selects language, page is 1-based, and next_page indicates more results. This goes beyond schema's brief field descriptions.

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 'Search the PlayStation Store' and lists result contents (price, platforms, classification, media). However, it does not differentiate from sibling PlayStation tools (e.g., playstation_browse, playstation_category), leaving some ambiguity.

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 explains pagination (page parameter, next_page) and notes 'credential-free public data'. It does not specify when to use search vs browse/category/deals, nor provides alternative guidance.

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