compare_markets

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses that results are sorted by modal price (cheapest first), which is useful. However, it does not mention whether the operation is read-only, any authentication needs, or potential side effects. The disclosure is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences plus a standalone line. Every sentence adds value, with no redundancy. It is front-loaded with the core action and then provides a key benefit.

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 an output schema (existing but not shown), so return details are not required. However, the description lacks explanation for 'modal price' and does not clarify the meaning of 'top_n' or 'state'. For a relatively simple tool, it covers the primary use but misses minor contextual details.

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?

The description only indirectly references the 'commodity' parameter by mentioning 'a commodity.' The 'state' and 'top_n' parameters are not explained at all. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but does not, leaving the agent to infer semantics for two of three parameters.

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 'Compare prices of a commodity across different markets,' specifying the action (compare), resource (prices of a commodity), and scope (across markets). It distinguishes from siblings like get_commodity_price (single price) and list_markets (just listing) by focusing on comparative pricing.

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 'Great for finding the cheapest mandi' implies a specific use case, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_price_summary for aggregated stats). No exclusions or conditions are provided.

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