tokopedia_home

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that data is 'public' and that omitting tab_id selects the first tab, which is useful. However, it doesn't mention pagination behavior, page limit handling, response format details, or potential errors — gaps that matter given there is no output schema to fall back on.

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 sentences with no filler: the first states the core purpose, the second delivers the key usage caveat about tab_id. It is front-loaded and every clause earns its place.

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 simple read-only tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter defaults, and the sibling relationship. It stops short of describing the exact shape of 'product-card recommendations,' but the essential calling information — how to invoke with no args, how to target a specific tab, and how to paginate — is present or derivable from the 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 the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the default when tab_id is omitted ('first available tab') and how to obtain valid tab IDs via /tokopedia/home/tabs — this clarifies optionality in a way the schema properties alone do not.

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 begins with 'Get Tokopedia home recommendations' — a specific verb plus resource — and further clarifies with 'Returns public product-card recommendations for a current Tokopedia home tab.' It clearly differentiates from the sibling tokopedia_home_tabs by stating what this tool returns (recommendations) versus what the sibling is for (discovering tabs).

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 instruction 'Omit tab_id for the first available tab; discover other tabs through /tokopedia/home/tabs' gives concrete guidance on when and how to use parameters, and points to the sibling tool for alternative usage. It doesn't explicitly discuss when not to use the tool versus other Tokopedia tools (e.g., search), but the home-feed context is clear enough.

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