get_watch_sales

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

No annotations provided. The description adds context by listing returned fields (hammer price, date, auction house, lot URL) and mentions specific auction houses, beyond the output schema. However, it omits details like pagination, ordering, or rate limits.

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?

Single sentence that is front-loaded and contains no fluff. Every word adds value, efficiently conveying the tool's purpose and typical output.

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 existence of an output schema and simple parameters (two fields), the description is sufficient. It names the core data fields and auction houses, leaving little ambiguity. Could mention result ordering or lack of pagination, but overall complete for the tool's 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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters. The description does not need to repeat parameter meaning, but it adds value by explaining how variation_id narrows results. Baseline score is appropriate.

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 retrieves auction sale records for a watch model, naming specific auction houses (Sotheby's, Christie's) and data fields (hammer price, date, etc.). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_price_history (market prices) and get_watch_info (watch details).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the context of siblings makes its purpose clear. Implied usage for auction history, but lacks when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations.

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