search_products

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds a concrete behavioral detail: the marked fallback that removes non-matching tariff or Marketplace variations when DigiKey returns them. This goes beyond the annotations and gives the agent insight into result filtering behavior.

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, front-loaded sentence. It starts with the main verb and resource, then appends the fallback behavior in a semicolon clause. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 description conveys the primary purpose and one behavioral quirk, but for a complex tool with a nested schema, many filters, and pagination support, it lacks context on how to compose a request or what the response entails. The readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations help, but the description leaves gaps about usage patterns.

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 compensate. The phrase 'native filters' is vague and does not explain the many parameters within the nested request object (e.g., limit, offset, parametric_filters, tariff_filter). The schema itself has some nested descriptions, but the tool description adds no parameter semantics.

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 purpose: 'Search DigiKey with native filters.' The verb 'Search' and resource 'DigiKey' are specific, and it distinguishes itself from sibling search tools like search_orders (orders) and search_mouser_products (Mouser). The 'native filters' scope further clarifies this is DigiKey's product search.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'native filters' and a fallback but does not say 'use this when searching DigiKey products' or 'for Mouser products, use search_mouser_products.' Usage context is only implied by the resource name.

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