buygit_random

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

With no annotations, the description discloses that the tool returns random listings with specific attributes (license, risk, popularity, pricing). It implies read-only behavior and non-deterministic results. Could mention if any mutation or side effects, but likely none.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and output details, followed by use cases and optional parameter note. No wasted words.

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's simplicity (2 params, output schema exists), the description adequately covers purpose, parameters, and usage context. No missing critical information.

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% (both parameters described). Description adds context on how parameters are used (count as number of picks, category to narrow pool) but does not provide semantics beyond the schema, so baseline 3 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?

The description uses clear verb 'Surface' and specifies the resource: random crawler listings with concrete signals (license, risk, popularity, pricing). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like search, trending, or get_listing by focusing on randomness and surprise.

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: 'surprise me', category browsing, seeding suggestions when user has no intent. Does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, but the use cases are well-defined.

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