Search OlaOla Products

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the source method and the default disabling of content hints, which is useful. However, it does not mention auth requirements, rate limits, side effects, or output behavior beyond candidates being inspectable/addable.

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?

Three concise sentences with front-loaded purpose: first sentence defines the action and method, second sentence states capabilities, third adds a behavioral default. No filler or repetition.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It lacks parameter details, output format, and guidance on inputs like queries or maxPerQuery. The sibling context hints at complementary tools but the description doesn't leverage that.

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 has 4 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description only explains includeContentHints ('disabled by default, must be explicitly requested'). It does not explain queries, maxPerQuery, or maxContentHintsPerQuery. This leaves significant gaps for agent 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?

Description clearly states the verb 'search' and the resource 'real product candidates' using specific methods (storefront search and product sitemap). It distinguishes itself from siblings like olaola_search_product_content and olaola_get_product by specifying the search source and that candidates can be opened/inspected/added to carts.

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?

Description implies usage for searching product candidates but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like olaola_get_product or olaola_search_product_content. It provides one guideline (WP content context disabled by default) but no exclusions or prerequisites.

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