originselect

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It successfully discloses return behavior ('scored and ranked results with match reasons') but omits operational traits like read-only safety, rate limits, pagination behavior, or error conditions. Partial compensation for missing annotations.

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 sentences with zero waste: first establishes purpose, second lists filtering capabilities, third describes return format. Front-loaded with the core action ('Search OriginSelect's curated catalog') and appropriately sized for the parameter complexity.

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 10 parameters with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description adequately compensates by explaining the return format ('scored and ranked results with match reasons'). Complete for a search tool of this complexity, though could explicitly note that all filters are optional.

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 100%, establishing a baseline of 3. The description lists filterable fields (country, values, category, brand, price) matching schema parameters, and provides examples like 'women-owned, organic, b-corp' that mirror schema enums. Does not add significant semantic meaning beyond the comprehensive 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?

Description explicitly states the tool searches 'OriginSelect's curated catalog of ethical, origin-verified products' with specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search_brands' (products vs brands) and 'get_categories'/'get_countries' (search vs metadata retrieval).

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?

Provides implicit usage guidance by listing filterable dimensions (country, values, category, brand, price) and noting that results are 'scored and ranked with match reasons.' However, lacks explicit guidance on when to use versus siblings like 'refine_search' or 'search_brands,' and doesn't mention that all parameters are optional.

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