best_price

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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure on its own. It does reveal useful behavior: prices include delivery and new/used results are separated. It does not mention side effects, data sources, or how thresholds affect results, but the core behavior is stated.

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 a single concise sentence with no filler or repetition. The main outcome is front-loaded, though the phrasing is telegraphic.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. However, with four parameters and zero parameter documentation, the description is not complete enough for an agent to confidently set 'detail' and 'used_threshold' 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain any of the four parameters. While 'article' and 'zipcode' are somewhat self-evident, 'detail' and 'used_threshold' have no meaning clarified anywhere, making correct invocation unreliable.

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's result: the best delivered price for a single article, with new and used items separated. It is understandable on its own, but it lacks an explicit verb and does not differentiate from the sibling tools price_project and list_sources.

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 phrase 'pour un seul article' implies this tool is for single-item price lookups, which contrasts with the project-oriented price_project and list-oriented list_sources siblings. However, there is no explicit instruction about when to use this tool versus those alternatives.

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