search_offers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the tool 'returns matching offers' but omits details like read-only nature, pagination, sorting, error handling, or any prerequisites. This is insufficient for a search operation.

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 a single sentence with no waste, efficiently conveying the core purpose and return fields. It could be improved by including parameter or behavior details, but it remains appropriately sized for a simple 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?

Given no output schema, no annotations, and 4 parameters with 0% schema coverage, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain return structure, pagination behavior, or how limit affects results, which are critical for a search tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'free-text query, category, and/or segment' corresponding to query, category, and segment parameters, but omits the limit parameter entirely. It adds no further meaning beyond parameter names, leaving gaps in understanding.

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 marketing offers by free-text query, category, and/or segment, and specifies the returned fields (title, copy, image, CTAs). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_offer (single offer retrieval) and search_campaigns (different resource type).

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 implies usage for searching offers, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_offer or get_top_offers. No exclusions or recommended contexts are given.

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