yahoo_shopping_home

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It states the data source is Yahoo Shopping's own server-rendered homepage and that it returns an editorial feed with specific fields. This gives an agent a clear model of the data, avoids implying search behavior, and implicitly signals a read-only fetch.

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 well-organized and front-loaded, beginning with what the tool returns. Every sentence adds value, including the explicit non-search qualification, with no redundant repetition of schema annotations.

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 zero-parameter, simple homepage feed, the description is mostly complete: it specifies what is returned and why it is not a product search API. It could mention pagination or the ordering of the feed, but that is minor for a homepage feed's usage.

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?

The tool has no parameters, and the schema is completely empty with 100% coverage. The description confirms that no search query or catalog is available, which supports the fact that the tool expects no input. Baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4.

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 clearly states the tool returns Yahoo Shopping's homepage editorial story feed, listing the exact fields (title, destination URL, category, thumbnail). It differentiates its scope as editorial/deals content vs a product-search API, providing clear distinction for an agent.

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 notes what this tool is not, a product-search API, and clarifies that shopping.yahoo.com has no searchable catalog. This helps an agent avoid misusing it for product search. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives like yahoo_shopping_category, but the exclusion is strong enough to guide basic usage.

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