Search products

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description does not need to repeat that. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context—it does not mention return format, pagination, sorting defaults, or any side effects. It is a bare-bones statement with no extra transparency beyond what annotations provide.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action and main attributes. Every word contributes meaning; there is no redundancy or filler. It is exceptionally concise while conveying the essential purpose.

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 the tool has 8 parameters and no output schema, a one-sentence description is insufficient. It omits any mention of sorting, limit, or return shape, and does not provide guidance on how to combine filters. Although the schema covers parameter details, the description lacks the contextual richness needed to understand the tool's full behavior, especially in the absence of an output schema.

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?

The description lists key filter types (keyword, category, price range, stock availability) which roughly correspond to schema properties, and 'price range' usefully implies the pair of min_price and max_price. However, with 63% schema description coverage, the description adds only marginal meaning beyond the rich parameter descriptions already present in the schema. It does not explain the detailed semantics like keyword matching behavior.

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 the tool's function: 'Find products by keyword, category, price range or stock availability.' It names a specific resource (products) and the main filter dimensions, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'search_reviews' that target a different resource.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention sibling tools, use cases, or exclusions. While the resource and filters imply a product search use case, there is no direct comparison or exclusions, leaving the selection process to inference.

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