Search DNS Shop products

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/idempotent, and the description adds useful behavioral context beyond those: results depend on the session city, compact defaults to true, and stock is returned as a fixed enum. The description also surfaces the SESSION_DROP concern without contradicting any annotation.

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 dense but not wasteful; every sentence contributes either purpose, a caveat, or routing guidance. It could be improved with more visual structure or bullets, but the front-loaded purpose and compact phrasing keep it scannable.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description appropriately explains the return contract (id format, stock enum, key fields) and important contextual behavior like session-city dependence and sort scoping. Combined with the schema and annotations, nothing critical is missing for an agent to call this tool correctly.

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?

Since the schema covers 100% of the 9 parameters, the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining the compact default, the preferred limit range, and the query-scoped behavior of sort=price_desc, which is not obvious from the schema alone. It does not add nuance for every parameter, but the schema already documents those.

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 and resource ('Search products on dns-shop.ru') and enumerates the exact return fields, so it is immediately distinguishable from the many dns_* sibling tools. The description makes the tool's role as the product-search entry point clear.

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 tells the agent to use dns_search_multi for 3+ queries to avoid SESSION_DROP, and names likely follow-ups (dns_product_details, dns_compare_products, dns_products_batch). It also gives operational guidance like preferring limit 5–8 and clarifies that sort=price_desc applies only to the current query results, not the full catalog.

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