compare_marketplaces

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It discloses parallel search, returns organic cards with live selling_price, and suggests follow-up actions. This provides a reasonable behavioral picture for a search tool, even though it omits pagination or error handling. Adds value by clarifying the real-time price aspect.

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?

Four sentences, each adding value: purpose, when to use, what it returns, follow-up guidance. Front-loaded with the core action, no fluff, well-structured.

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?

Covers main use case and follow-up, but omits explanation of parameters and any details about output format beyond 'top organic cards'. The presence of an output schema helps, but its content is unknown. For a tool with multiple parameters and zero schema descriptions, more completeness would be expected.

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 parameters except implicitly query via 'same query'. It does not mention limit, max_price, or min_price, though their names are somewhat self-explanatory. With zero schema coverage, the description should compensate, but it does not.

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?

States a specific verb (Search) and resource (Flipkart and Amazon.in in parallel). Clearly differentiates from siblings which are single-marketplace searches by mentioning 'across stores'. Also specifies it returns top organic cards with live prices.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this when the shopper wants the cheaper/better listing across stores.' This gives clear context. It also suggests follow-up calls to get_product and amazon_get_product, implying this is a preliminary step. Does not explicitly name alternatives but implies single-store searches are not this tool's purpose.

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