search_mouser_products

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds a minimal behavioral note ('Shipping is unavailable') but does not disclose pagination behavior, return format, or other potential surprises. It provides slight value beyond the annotations.

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 two sentences and front-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence about shipping is short and relevant but slightly disconnected. No wasted words overall.

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?

The tool has a nested request object with multiple filtering options and records pagination, yet the description provides no details about these. It doesn't mention how to specify search mode, pagination, or filtering by manufacturer, in-stock, or RoHS. The output is not described, and the description is too sparse for a search tool of this complexity.

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 compensate for parameter meaning. It mentions availability, lifecycle, compliance, and price breaks, which loosely maps to schema fields like in_stock and rohs, but it does not explicitly explain the request object structure or how to use parameters like mode, manufacturer, or starting_record.

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 searches Mouser catalog data covering availability, lifecycle, compliance, and price breaks. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like search_products or get_product_details, but the focus on Mouser catalog data makes its purpose clear.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_products or get_product_details. The description merely states what it does, providing no context for tool selection or exclusions.

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