sparkfun_search

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that the data is public, that filters are dynamic and must use values from the response's filters array, and that results are paginated. It doesn't describe return formats or auth, but for a read-only search this is adequate.

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, each adding distinct information: purpose, scope and features, and filter format. No redundant or filler content; the core instruction is front-loaded.

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 4-param search tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core behavioral contract: what is searched, pagination, and the dynamic facet requirement. It references the response's filters array but doesn't describe the full response shape, which is a minor gap given the absence of an output 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so all parameters are already described. The description adds crucial semantics for the filter parameter: each filter must be 'attribute:value' and values must come from the response's filters array, going beyond the schema's generic 'Repeatable dynamic facet' phrasing.

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 SparkFun products') and adds scope ('public SparkFun product data') with pagination and facet filters. It doesn't explicitly name sibling tools like sparkfun_product or sparkfun_categories, but the search-over-all-products framing makes the distinction reasonably clear.

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 gives clear contextual guidance: use this to search public product data with pagination and dynamic facets. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is sufficient to route an agent to this search tool rather than a product-detail or categories tool.

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