Megamarket Search

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

Annotations cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, openWorld), and the description adds meaningful beyond-annotation detail: address sourcing, the private-account read caveat, _meta.warnings semantics, healthy=false conditions, and auth/runtime prerequisites (operator's Chrome). This is unusually rich behavioral disclosure.

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?

Front-loaded opening sentence is efficient, but the description then dives into dense _meta/address_source detail that reads more like internal notes than task-relevant guidance for an agent. Structured headers help, but the middle paragraph is heavy relative to a single-parameter search tool.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, yet the description summarizes return format and error format anyway. Combined with address-resolution behavioral notes, it is largely complete for a one-parameter search, though it omits pagination/limit behavior and when the operator's Chrome is assumed available.

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 100% and there is only one parameter (query), so the schema already carries the semantics. The description adds nothing about query syntax, length, or localization beyond what the schema provides.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: search the Megamarket catalog via the mobile API inside the operator's Chrome. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like ozon_search by naming the Megamarket catalog, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from other marketplace *_search tools beyond the store name.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. There is deep context about address resolution behavior, but no routing advice such as when to prefer megamarket_search over compare_prices or marketplace_sources. Usage is implied by the tool name, not stated.

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