search_products

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: minimum 2-character term, field-specific search, exact match option, pagination, and relevance ordering. It does not mention rate limits or authentication, but covers the main operational aspects.

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 well-structured with sections for workflow tips and common use cases. Every sentence provides useful information without redundancy, and the purpose is front-loaded immediately.

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 6 parameters and no output schema, the description thoroughly covers input usage but lacks any mention of the output format or default response fields. This is a gap for a tool without 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 6 parameters. The description adds value by explaining how to use fields, exact_match, and include_fields with concrete examples, going beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 it searches for products with advanced filtering, and provides specific use cases like searching by name, code, SKU, and exact match. It distinguishes itself from other search tools by specifying product-specific search across all product fields.

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?

Provides explicit workflow tips and common use cases with example JSON, giving clear context on when to use the tool. However, it does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, such as universal search or other entity-specific searches.

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