psa_price_guide_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that each result is a matching set containing the query's matching cards/items, and that the full price table requires a separate call. This is meaningful context beyond a generic search description, though it does not cover pagination behavior or error cases.

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?

Three sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, and each sentence contributes: what it does, how it behaves, and how to proceed to the next tool. The structure is efficient and scannable.

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?

For a search tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description explains the result grouping and the necessary follow-up call. It covers the key workflow an agent needs. Minor gaps like no-result behavior and explicit pagination defaults are left to the schema, which already documents page and page_size.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a comparison to PSA's own site search box and examples of free-text input, but these largely restate the schema's parameter descriptions. It does not materially deepen understanding of page or page_size semantics.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Search PSA Price Guide' by free text. It clarifies that results are sets containing matching cards/items, which distinguishes it from the follow-up psa-price-guide-set tool. The reference to 'matching PSA's own site search box' gives the agent a concrete behavioral anchor.

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 explicitly names psa-price-guide-set as the follow-up tool and explains when to use it: after obtaining category_path, set_path, and set_id. It provides clear context for the search-to-set workflow, though it does not explicitly exclude other siblings like psa_price_guide_categories.

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