taobao_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the TLS fingerprinting approach, MTOP signature, cookie dependency, concurrency safety, and lack of rate limiting. It doesn't cover failure modes like cookie expiry, but the core behavioral traits are transparent.

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 compact, well-structured with bullet points, and every sentence provides essential information: purpose, technical principle, auth requirement, and concurrency guarantee. No filler or redundancy.

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 output schema exists and the 2-parameter schema is fully described, the description covers all relevant aspects: auth, execution model, rate-limit status, concurrency safety, and the way to search. It is complete for this 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?

Both parameters (keyword and limit) are fully documented in the input schema with descriptions and examples. The tool description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema already provides, 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 clearly states '搜索淘宝/天猫商品' (search Taobao/Tmall products), specifying a concrete verb and resource. This unambiguously differentiates it from sibling tools like taobao_product (detail), jd_search, and pdd_search.

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 clear usage context: it is a pure-script, browser-free search with no rate limit, and requires specific cookie setup. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose and prerequisites make when-to-use evident.

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