Search BestPrice products

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses important behavioral traits: it returns at most eight grouped products, excludes prohibited/age-restricted/digital/service/unverified branches, and explains that price_from is not a buyable quote and may represent promoted or out-of-stock offers. The warning that catalog labels are untrusted display data adds critical safety context not available in annotations or 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 front-loaded with the primary use case and then systematically covers exclusions, alternatives, return limits, retry behavior, and numeric caveats. It is longer than typical descriptions, but each sentence carries substantive guidance, especially safety-critical warnings. It earns a 4 rather than a 5 because the length, while justified, is at the upper edge of conciseness.

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 the tool's complexity—8 parameters, exclusion branches, pricing caveats, and interaction with sibling tools—the description is exceptionally complete. It covers when to use, when not to use, how to refine with suggested_queries, price_from semantics, and the need for compare_offers for delivered totals. The presence of an output schema means return-value documentation is not the description's burden, and nothing essential for correct invocation 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?

The schema already documents all parameters at 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantic value by clarifying that price_min/price_max are hard bounds, required_features are unverified relevance hints, and query should contain product/model/category. This strengthens parameter understanding beyond schema descriptions, though a 5 would require even more per-parameter nuance than is provided.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: discovering a safe physical product across the BestPrice Greece catalog when the exact product_id is unknown. It names the resource, the action (search/discover), and explicitly distinguishes itself from related tools like compare_offers, making sibling differentiation immediate.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance ('when the user wants to discover a safe physical product... or when the exact product_id is unknown') and when-not-to-use guidance ('Do not use it for checkout, direct merchant links, or repeated offer comparison after an exact product_id is known'). It also names compare_offers as the alternative for delivered totals, leaving no ambiguity about tool selection.

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