amazon_reviews

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

With no annotations, the description takes responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions credit cost (5 API credits per request), pagination, concurrency recommendation, and return format. Missing details on error handling or input validation, but overall adequate.

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 efficient: 4-5 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by important notes. No redundant or irrelevant information.

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 9 parameters and no output schema, the description provides a return format example, which adds completeness. It covers key aspects like pagination, concurrency, and input alternatives but lacks details on potential errors or limits.

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%, so the description adds minimal value beyond what is in the schema. It groups parameters (asin+domain+page) and notes the url shortcut, but does not elaborate on each parameter's meaning. Baseline score 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 it scrapes customer reviews from Amazon product pages, with explicit filtering options. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that target other platforms (e.g., google_maps_reviews, walmart_reviews) by specifying Amazon.

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?

Provides clear usage guidance: pagination via page parameter (starts at 1), single concurrency recommendation, and alternative ways to provide input (asin+domain+page vs url). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other review scraping tools or state when not to use.

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