Trade site search links

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description carries most of the burden and delivers: it never contacts the trade site, mods are searched at 80% of value by default, cheapest first, unrecognised mods surface in 'leftOut', and the player must open the links themselves. It doesn't describe link lifetime or format, but the added context is substantial for a link-generator.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose and scoping constraint, then efficiently branches rares vs uniques. Dense with parentheticals but nearly every clause carries unique information; only the 80%-default explanation and 'share the links' advice overlap slightly in intent.

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 3-param tool with no output schema and sparse annotations, the description covers purpose, both usage modes, the side-effect constraint, and the leftOut return behavior. Minor gaps remain around link expiry and whether both 'rares' and 'uniques' can be combined in one call, but nothing blocks correct invocation.

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 33%, so the description must compensate. It explains strictness's default behavior (80% of mod value) which the schema leaves bare (only 0.1-1 bounds), and clarifies that 'slot' accepts a slot, item class, or base type. league default is already in the schema and is not repeated, which is appropriate.

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?

States a precise verb+resource: it produces links to pre-filled trade-site searches. Crucially it disambiguates from data-fetching siblings by saying it 'never contacts the trade site', so an agent knows it returns URLs, not prices. This distinguishes it from item_prices and find_uniques.

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?

Explicit branching guidance: use 'rares' with slot/item class plus mods for rare searches, use 'uniques' with names for unique searches. It even points to sibling tools (evaluate_build, stat_priorities) as sources for the mods to supply, which is exactly the routing an agent needs.

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