Preview Recommendations

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only mentions 'Free.' and the output composition ('sponsored + similar x402 services'). It does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects, authorization needs, rate limits, or read-only nature. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotation support.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences that front-load the key information (free, purpose, inputs). Every word earns its place; no redundant or vague phrasing.

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 full schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides sufficient clarity on purpose and inputs. It mentions the output composition but lacks details on the exact format. It is adequate for a low-complexity tool.

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 each parameter described. The description adds context beyond the schema (e.g., self-exclusion for service, sponsored + similar for category/endpoint). It slightly improves the understanding of parameters.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: to preview the recommendations block for the x402-ads middleware. It specifies the action ('See'), the resource ('typed recommendations block'), and the inputs ('endpoint and category'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools which are analytics/reporting tools.

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 implies usage when wanting to preview recommendations, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_category_demand). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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