scrape_amazon_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so well. It discloses robots.txt compliance, allowlist enforcement, crawl delay, page budget, stops on bot challenges, and environment prerequisites. These are meaningful behavioral details beyond the schema.

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 compact and information-dense, with the main purpose front-loaded. It does not waste words and every sentence adds meaningful guidance: output fields, scraping constraints, and required environment configuration.

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 an output schema exists, return values do not need elaboration. The description covers purpose, constraints, and setup, but it leaves the optional parameters undocumented. For a 3-parameter tool with 0% schema coverage, this is a noticeable gap.

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 must compensate. It clarifies 'keyword' implicitly, but it does not explain the 'pages' or 'render' parameters, their effects, or defaults. An agent would not know that pages controls pagination depth or that render toggles JavaScript rendering.

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?

Description uses a specific verb-resource pair ('Scrape live Amazon India search results') and enumerates the exact extracted fields (ASIN, title, price, rating, review count, badge, image, sponsored flag). This clearly differentiates it from sibling product-detail scrapers.

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?

The description makes it clear when this tool should be selected: when live Amazon India search results for a keyword are needed. It states key operational context such as browser requirements, but it does not explicitly name alternative tools for product-level scraping or list when not to use this tool.

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