List values of one facet

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds behavioral context beyond these: it mentions the response is scoped to the same search context and that returned values reflect the narrowed result set. It also notes that the output includes ids, which is helpful for chaining calls. No contradictions with annotations.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by the key use case, and a closing note about search parameters. It wastes no words and every sentence earns its place. Length is appropriate for the tool's complexity.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should convey return shape. It states 'List the selectable values (with their ids)' which implies a list of objects, but does not detail pagination or fields. However, for a facet listing tool with extensive parameter support, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds a concrete example of the 'code' parameter (brand vs size) and stresses that all search parameters are accepted, which helps understand filtering. However, it does not elaborate on syntax or behavior of individual params beyond what the schema already provides. This matches the baseline without exceeding it.

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 lists selectable values (with ids) for a single facet, scoped to search context. It gives a concrete use case (resolving human names to ids for oskelly_search_products) and differentiates from siblings by specifying it returns facet values. The verb 'List' plus resource 'values of one facet' is specific and unambiguous.

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 explains when to use it ('how you resolve a human name to the numeric id') and that it accepts all search parameters for narrowing. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the purpose sentence makes clear it's for facet enumeration rather than search or tree browsing. Overall, the guidance is clear without exclusions.

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