Stock Search Tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that this is a read-only search operation, that it returns matching product names and IDs, and indirectly signals that stock details are not its purpose by routing barcode queries elsewhere. Minor gaps remain around edge cases like empty results, but they are not critical for a simple search tool.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences none of which are redundant. The first sentence states the core operation, the second the return value, and the third gives usage context and an alternative.

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?

For a single-parameter search tool with an output schema, the description provides enough information: what to search, what the response contains, when to use it, and which sibling tool to choose for barcode-with-stock-details. Nothing essential is missing.

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 100%, so the schema already documents the query parameter as matching product names and barcodes. The description adds the useful 'substring' nuance, which is useful but does not dramatically expand the schema's meaning.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search for products') and clearly defines the resource and matching behavior (name substring or barcode). It also distinguishes itself from stock_barcode_lookup_tool by naming that sibling, so an agent can tell them apart.

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?

It explicitly states when to use this tool ('when you are not sure of the exact product name') and points to stock_barcode_lookup_tool as the alternative for direct barcode lookup with stock details. This gives clear route selection guidance.

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