get_product_offers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds substantial operational behavior beyond the annotations: each page costs 1 credit, pagination should be minimized, filters are cheaper than pagination, and the result includes the Buy Box winner. This is the kind of cost and response context an agent needs before invoking the tool.

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 front-loaded with the most important information: what the tool returns and its purpose. Every sentence contributes value, including the cost warning and sibling differentiation. It is slightly longer than strictly necessary, but the extra length is justified by the pagination-cost guidance and the alternative-tool routing.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description enumerates the key return fields (price, shipping, condition, fulfillment type, seller rating, Buy Box winner), making the result shape understandable. It also covers cost behavior, pagination strategy, filter alternatives, and when to use a sibling tool. For a read-only offer-list tool, this is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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%, so the schema already documents every parameter. The description adds useful semantic guidance beyond the schema by explaining that max_page should be kept at 1 unless the full list is needed and that condition/shipping filters should be preferred over pagination. It does not add per-parameter detail for all 7 params, but the schema is already comprehensive, so this is above baseline.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: it fetches the list of seller offers for a product and enumerates exactly what is returned (price, shipping cost, condition, fulfillment type, seller rating, Buy Box winner). It also distinguishes itself from get_product_detail by emphasizing the WHO-sells-at-WHAT-price use case, so a model can differentiate it from siblings.

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?

It explicitly states when to use this tool ('when the question is about WHO sells the product and at WHAT price') and when not to, pointing to get_product_detail for product details. It also gives operational guidance: start with a single page, only increase max_page when needed, and prefer condition/shipping filters over pagination because it is cheaper.

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