market_optimize_purchase

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the tool 'optimizes' and 'replaces' workflows but does not state if it performs mutations, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what side effects occur. The lack of behavioral details is a significant gap.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core value proposition 'one-call purchase optimization.' No redundant words; every sentence adds value.

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?

Despite 4 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description is very brief. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or parameter usage beyond the high-level purpose. For a tool with this complexity, more detail is needed.

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 description coverage is only 50% (items and constraints have descriptions, country and include_intel do not). The tool description adds no parameter-specific explanations, relying entirely on the schema. Given the incomplete schema coverage, the description should have compensated but did not.

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 it performs 'one-call purchase optimization' with specific capabilities: basket compare, TCO, substitutes, intel, and action links. It distinguishes from sibling tools by replacing a multi-step workflow (search → compare → intel), making its purpose unique and well-defined.

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 indicates the tool is for consolidating fragmented steps (search, compare, intel) into one call, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly list when not to use it or mention alternatives, though the sibling tools imply alternatives for individual steps.

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