Walmart Search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two genuinely useful facts: results come back as Markdown and the call is proxied through the Decodo Web Scraping API. It says nothing about result counts, pagination, latency, or failure modes inherent to scraping, which is the main remaining gap.

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 efficient sentences: the action and return format come first, the optional scoping second, and the docs link last. No wasted clauses, though the docs URL occupies space that could carry a behavioral detail.

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 read-only search endpoint with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers what the tool does, its optional scoping, and its return format (Markdown). Only minor gaps remain around result volume and pagination.

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 schema already defines all four parameters including `jsRender`. The description only echoes `storeId` and `deliveryZip` at a high level and adds no format or behavioral detail (e.g., how storeId affects inventory results). Baseline 3 given the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 Walmart for a keyword") plus the return format ("results as Markdown"), and names the underlying service and target. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like walmart_product or amazon_search by the search-vs-product and Walmart-vs-other-retailer framing, though it never explicitly contrasts with 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?

"Use it to find Walmart products, optionally for a store or delivery ZIP code" gives a usage context and mentions the store/ZIP scenarios, but it restates the purpose rather than providing when-to-use-vs-alternatives guidance. No exclusions, no pointer to walmart_product for detail lookups, no mention of when to prefer google_search or target_search.

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