search_shop_offers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds essentially nothing behavioral beyond that — no pagination behavior, no rate limits, no indication of what 'orçamento disponível' means operationally.

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?

A single compact sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded and wastes no words, though brevity here comes at the cost of the missing information noted elsewhere.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required. But with 7 undocumented optional parameters, no usage routing, and a complex sibling landscape, the definition leaves the agent without enough to call the tool 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?

Seven parameters with 0% schema description coverage means the description carries the full burden, and it supplies none of it. The nouns it mentions (comissão, classificação, orçamento) are return-data concepts, not any of the actual parameters (page, limit, keyword, shop_id, sort_type, shop_types, is_key_seller), so the agent learns nothing about how to invoke 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?

States a verb ('Pesquisa') and a resource ('ofertas de lojas') along with some returned data fields (comissão, classificação, orçamento). However, it gives no signal distinguishing it from the many sibling search tools (search_offers, search_campaign_offers, search_shop_offers' nearest analogues), so an agent cannot confidently pick it over them.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the sibling search tools it competes with. The agent must infer that this is the shop-scoped variant purely from the name.

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