search_boats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Search' implies a read-only operation, but no additional traits (e.g., pagination behavior, rate limits, or that it returns a list of ads) are disclosed. It is minimally transparent but not misleading.

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 a single, information-dense sentence (11 words) that front-loads the tool's core purpose and differentiator. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 (10 parameters) and no output schema, the description is somewhat minimal but adequate. It correctly identifies the domain (Blocket boats) and key filter groups. However, it omits mention of other important filter dimensions (e.g., location, sort order) and the return type, though the rich schema partially compensates.

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 100%, with every parameter described. The description mentions 'type, length, price' as boat-specific filters, which maps to schema parameters but adds no new syntax or format details. With full schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb ('Search'), resource ('used boats on Blocket'), and scope ('boat-specific filters'), directly distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_cars and search_motorcycles. It is specific and unambiguous, leaving no doubt about what the tool does.

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 implies usage context by mentioning 'used boats on Blocket,' but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over sibling tools like 'search' or 'search_cars.' No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, so guidance is only implied.

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