Search the Ethio-Viral catalog

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the transparency burden. It discloses the search behavior (full-text), the result cap (up to 50), and that prices are live. However, it doesn't explicitly state the operation is read-only (though implied) or address rate limits or auth requirements. For a read-only search, this is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 consists of two efficient sentences that front-load the purpose and immediately state the key behavioral constraints (result limit, live prices). Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides a solid high-level picture of what is returned (products with live prices, up to 50) and the search scope. It doesn't detail pagination or result fields, but given the tool's simplicity and the absence of an output schema, it is reasonably complete for agent decision-making.

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?

The schema description covers the query parameter with examples, and the tool description adds no additional parameter-level information. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate even though the description doesn't further elaborate on query syntax.

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 the catalog (airtime, eSIMs, gift cards, game top-ups) and returns up to 50 products with live prices. This specific verb+resource scope differentiates it from sibling list/get tools without needing to open their schemas.

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 this is the tool for free-text search across the listed categories, but it doesn't explicitly say when to use it instead of alternatives like list_categories or get_product, nor does it mention when not to use it. Usage context is left to inference.

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