search_products

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden and does well by revealing the exact return structure (products list with name, price in IDR, rating, shop, URL, and count) and the filtering behavior of every parameter. It does not disclose sorting order or edge-case error handling, a minor gap given the otherwise thorough context.

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-structured: a single-sentence purpose, a brief return summary, and a clearly formatted Args list covering all 13 parameters. Every line provides necessary information without redundant prose, making it highly scannable for an agent.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (13 parameters, no annotations), the description is fully complete: it covers purpose, output format, parameter semantics, and the relationship to get_product_details. The output schema also exists, but the description goes beyond it, ensuring an agent can invoke the tool correctly with no missing context.

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 0%, so the description must explain all parameters, and it does so comprehensively. Each parameter includes specific meanings, value mappings (e.g., condition 1=new, 2=used; shop_tier 2=Mall, 3=Power Shop), and examples, adding substantial value beyond the bare schema.

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 opens with 'Search Tokopedia products by keyword,' a specific verb+resource statement. It goes beyond a vague purpose by specifying the return format (dict with products list and count), clearly distinguishing it from the sibling tools for product details and reviews.

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?

It provides clear guidance for using search results: 'Each product can be passed to get_product_details for full information.' However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over get_product_reviews or when not to use it, so the guidance is strong but not exhaustive.

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