search_products

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows it's safe. The description adds behavioral details like language support, 'all_pages' behavior (up to 50 pages), and that include_details adds more tokens. No contradictions with 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?

The description is concise (three sentences) and front-loaded: first sentence gives purpose and scope, second explains input parameters, third adds language support. Every sentence provides essential information without redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description adequately covers search behavior, parameter usage, and edge cases (all_pages). It doesn't describe the return format, but for a search tool this is acceptable as the agent can infer from common patterns.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the description still adds value by explaining the relationship between query and filters, how filters combine (AND across groups, OR within), pagination (12 per page), and the effect of all_pages. This goes beyond the schema's descriptions.

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 searches products on KSP, an Israeli electronics retailer, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_filters, get_product, and get_product_images by focusing on general search functionality.

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 explains that free-text query or filters (from get_filters) can be used, and supports Hebrew and English. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use or alternative tools, but the guidance is clear enough for common use cases.

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