search_deals

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the search is over cached data, implying a read-only operation on potentially stale content. However, it does not describe the return format, whether it contacts the live site, or any rate limits. 'Cached' adds some context, but more could be said.

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 that is front-loaded with the action and resource. It is extremely concise with no filler or unnecessary words, while still capturing the essential purpose and key scoping dimensions.

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?

With 7 parameters and no output schema, the description is relatively brief. It does not explain the return structure or mention default behaviors like the limit. However, the schema covers parameter semantics, and the description's clarity about the search domain provides enough context for a basic 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 coverage is 100% with each parameter described, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds a high-level summary of filters but no new details beyond the schema. It does not compensate for any gaps, but none are needed.

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 identifies a specific action ('Search') on a specific resource ('cached RedFlagDeals topics') and lists the key dimensions (text, retailer, score, sort order). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_deal (single lookup) and monitor tools.

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 by stating what it searches, but it does not explicitly say when to use this vs. alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. Sibling tools like monitor_search exist, but no guidance is given for when to search vs. monitor.

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