therealreal_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does a solid job: it discloses that data is credential-free public data from The RealReal's server-rendered search page, describes the normalized summary plus count and cursor, and explains pagination. It does not mention rate limits or explicitly declare read-only status, but the 'credential-free public data' phrasing implies a safe read operation.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core action, then covers return values, pagination, and data source. There is mild redundancy between the opening summary sentence and the second sentence, but each sentence contributes useful 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?

For a 9-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers everything essential: what is searched, what is returned, how pagination works via the after cursor, and credential/auth expectations. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 echoes the schema's pagination behavior and mentions the filter dimensions, but it does not add new semantic detail beyond what each parameter's own description already provides.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Search The RealReal luxury consignment listings.' It goes beyond the name by describing the search mechanics (keyword plus optional filters) and the normalized output shape, which distinguishes it from sibling listing/detail/category tools even without naming them.

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 usage context (keyword search across the resale catalog with optional filters) and references the categories/designers/conditions endpoints as ID sources, hinting at the broader tool family. However, it never explicitly states when to prefer this over therealreal_category, therealreal_listing, or therealreal_autocomplete, nor what conditions rule those out.

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