deals

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of transparency. It discloses that the tool uses clipped coupons, sale prices, and price history, and that results are time-bound to 'this week.' However, it does not mention read-only behavior, authentication needs, or how the dependency on 'offers sync' affects results.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the value proposition and ending with a clear operational note. There is no unnecessary verbiage.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description explains the core behavior and a dependency but omits return format, parameter semantics, and potential side effects. For a simple list tool, it is adequately complete but leaves gaps that could affect correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 50%; gi_filter is described in the schema, but limit is undocumented. The description does not clarify the meaning of 'limit' or how it interacts with the listed data sources. The mention of 'price history' does not relate to parameters.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: showing best-value items this week based on clipped coupons, sale prices, and price history. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'offers' tool by emphasizing these unique data sources, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'list'.

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?

It provides an explicit usage instruction: 'Run after offers sync.' This gives a clear temporal dependency and implies when to use it. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, but the sequencing guidance is valuable.

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