price

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that clearing cache is possible and gives a condition for it, but it does not mention whether searches are read-only, what side effects occur, or any auth/rate limits. The behavioral disclosure is minimal.

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 brief but the first sentence is a comma-separated list of actions that is somewhat cryptic and lacks clear structure. It is not redundant or verbose, but the clarity suffers from the abrupt listing of actions.

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?

The tool has multiple behaviors (price history, search, cache clear) with no output schema and no annotations. The description does not explain return values, how the different modes interact, or provide enough context for correct invocation in varied scenarios. It is incomplete for a tool of this complexity.

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 only 33%, with q and sku lacking descriptions. The description adds meaning to 'sku' (price history by SKU) and 'clear' (cache clearing), and indirectly hints that 'q' relates to searching the local DB. However, it does not clarify the exact format or relationship between q and sku, so compensation is partial.

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 lists three separate capabilities (price history by SKU, search local DB, clear cache) without a clear primary verb or focus. It identifies a resource (price history) but lacks a specific action verb and does not distinguish it from siblings like 'search' or 'offers'.

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 only usage guidance is 'Use clear=true when user changes store/delivery location,' which addresses a specific parameter condition but does not explain when to use this tool over alternatives such as search or offers. No clear when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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