Search Korean used cars

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description still contributes non-obvious behavior: the plan-dependent deduplication caveat for 'all' and the fact that results are compact listings with a total count, which matters given there is no output schema. It omits rate limits or pagination limits, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Four tight sentences: purpose first, then source semantics, then the price-unit rule, then the return shape. Each sentence carries information the schema does not, and nothing is repeated from the enum or property descriptions.

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, zero-required search tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, source selection, price units, and return shape, which is most of what an agent needs. Remaining gaps (sort default, max limit of 50, and how model/model_group/model_search interact) are modest but real.

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?

The description adds real meaning beyond the schema for two tricky parameters: the source enum ('all' = three marketplaces deduplicated and plan-dependent) and the price unit, with the concrete example max_price 3000 = 30,000,000 KRW that prevents an order-of-magnitude error. It does not clarify the model vs. model_group vs. model_search distinction or pagination behavior across the other 19 parameters, so it stops short of full coverage.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Search live used car listings in South Korea'), which an agent can immediately separate from sibling readers like get_korean_car, get_korean_inspection, or find_korean_models. It also names the sibling market tool implicitly by scoping to South Korea, so search_chinese_cars is not confusable.

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 documents the default source and the meaning of the 'all' option, which is useful context, but it never says when to use this search tool versus get_korean_car (fetch one listing) or find_korean_models (discover valid model names). No exclusions or prerequisites are given, so usage is only implied.

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