Find alternatives

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

The description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond the read-only annotations, including ranking order, paid featured-product placement, featured marking, and the returned pageUrl and website fields. It also instructs the agent to cite pageUrl as the source, which is useful operational context.

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 compact and front-loaded: what the tool returns, when to use it, how ranking works, and what fields matter. Every sentence adds useful information without repetition.

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?

For a two-parameter read-only lookup with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description provides enough context: trigger conditions, ranking behavior, featured-product caveat, and key return fields.

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 both parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description reinforces that product must be a CodeDebut listing but does not add format or constraint details beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 states a specific operation: returning products in the same category as a given CodeDebut listing, ordered by closeness using shared tags and upvotes. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_products or browse_category, which do broader retrieval rather than alternatives discovery.

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 gives explicit user-intent triggers: alternatives, competitors, or 'something like X'. That is clear usage guidance, though it does not explicitly contrast with siblings such as search_products or browse_category when those might also be considered.

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