xbox_browse

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so well: it discloses default sort behavior, OR semantics across values of a repeatable filter, AND semantics across different filter fields, and cursor pagination fixed at 25 items per page. This adds significant behavioral detail beyond the schema.

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?

Four sentences, each contributing distinct information: purpose/scope, default ordering, filter combination logic, and pagination. No filler or redundant restatement of schema fields.

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 tool with 13 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential invocation behavior: default order, filter semantics, and pagination mechanics. It doesn't enumerate response fields, but the reference to 'next_cursor' in the schema combined with the catalog-browse context gives an agent enough to use it correctly.

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 meaningful semantic value by explaining how repeatable filter values combine (logical OR within a field) and how different filter fields combine (logical AND), which is not obvious from the schema alone. It also names the repeatable filter parameters explicitly.

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 ('Browse') and resource ('Xbox catalog'), and clarifies that it returns one page of the full storefront catalog. This distinguishes it from siblings like xbox_search, xbox_game, and xbox_reviews, though it doesn't name them explicitly.

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?

Provides clear context on when to use it: browsing the catalog with optional sort/filters, with default relevance ordering when no parameters are supplied. It doesn't explicitly state exclusions or alternatives, but the catalog-browse scope implies the use case compared to search-focused siblings.

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