Search Chinese used cars

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

Annotations already cover read-only/open-world, and the description usefully adds dedup behavior (Che168 duplicates hidden unless requested), localized prices in CNY with USD/EUR conversions, and the source aggregation. It omits pagination behavior and any rate/limit constraints, but adds real context beyond the annotations.

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 dense sentences, zero filler, and front-loaded with what is searched and where the data comes from before moving to units and filter values.

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 19-parameter search with no output schema, the description conveys sources, currency and conversion, dedup default, and how to source valid filter values. Return shape and pagination are unstated, but the essential calling context is present.

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 coverage is 89%, so descriptions for most of the 19 parameters are already in the schema (year_min/max, price, mileage, source, duplicates, etc.). The description only re-states the filter-value lookup convention, adding little that the schema doesn't already carry.

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 live used car listings in China') plus scope details: sources Dongchedi and Che168, duplicate merging, English output. It's clearly distinct from get_chinese_car (detail lookup) and search_korean_cars (different market), though it never names a sibling as the contrasting alternative.

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?

Gives actionable context: consult chinese_filter_values and chinese_models to get exact make, model, fuel and city values before calling. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not or routing versus get_chinese_car for single-listing lookups, so it stops short of full guidance.

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