compare_tools

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes behavior: fetches full profiles and presents parallel structure. Could add details like network calls or caching, but adequate.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections (overview, BEHAVIOR, USAGE GUIDELINES, EXAMPLE QUERIES). Each sentence adds value, though could be slightly more concise.

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, the description details expected output (pricing plans, features, ratings). Sibling tools are present for context. Missing info like response structure but overall complete.

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 descriptions for both parameters. The description adds that slugs must be exact and suggests using search_tools first, providing context beyond the schema.

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 a side-by-side structured comparison of two software products, specifying it returns pricing, features, ratings, and key differences. It effectively distinguishes from siblings like get_alternatives and get_pricing.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (e.g., 'X vs Y' queries) and when not to use (e.g., get_pricing for full plan details, get_alternatives without specific second tool). Provides example queries and cautions about slug accuracy.

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