product_seo_audit

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable context: it checks multiple specific elements, returns a score per check and recommendations, and includes cost control details via verbose and max_words. No contradictions.

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 with 4 informative sentences, each serving a purpose. It is front-loaded with the main action. A slightly tighter structure could be possible, but it remains efficient.

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 complexity (13 parameters, output schema exists), the description is thorough: it covers purpose, checks, usage context, return format, and cost control. Everything an agent needs is present.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining how `verbose` and `max_words` control output size and token cost, which goes beyond the schema definitions.

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 audits a fashion product page for SEO best practices, listing specific checks (meta title, description, JSON-LD, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling 'fashion_trend_analysis' by focusing on SEO audit, providing a specific verb+resource.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use this whenever a fashion brand wants to optimize a product listing for organic search' and notes it works for any e-commerce platform. Does not include exclusion criteria, but the guidance is clear and sufficient.

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