commerce_market_observation_query

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions routing under JWT, tenant, and company scope, which is helpful for understanding auth context. However, it does not state whether the tool is read-only, has side effects, rate limits, or other important behavioral aspects.

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, with a clear structure: action name, routing info, and parameter list. Every sentence serves a purpose, and there is no redundant information.

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 presence of an output schema, lack of return value detail is acceptable. However, for a tool with many siblings in the commerce domain, more context about the type of market observation queries supported would improve completeness. The description is adequate but not exhaustive.

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's param explanations are critical. It adds basic meaning: 'message' is a free-text objective, 'inputs' is an optional JSON string. This is adequate but not detailed; it could specify expected format or constraints.

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 it runs the 'market_observation_query' action, which is a specific commerce domain agent action. The name and brief explanation distinguish it from siblings like commerce_market_observation_ingest, but no explicit differentiation is provided.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only describes what it does without indicating suitable contexts or scenarios. There is no mention of when not to use it.

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