vtex_get_facets

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 states it 'gets' facets and filters, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it requires authentication, rate limits, what the output format is (e.g., JSON structure), or if it's idempotent. For a tool with no annotations, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words, making it appropriately concise. However, it's not front-loaded with critical details (e.g., it could start with 'Retrieve search filter attributes'), and the brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions like guidelines and transparency.

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 the tool's moderate complexity (retrieving search facets), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what facets and filters are, how they're used, or what the return values look like, leaving the agent to guess. Siblings like 'vtex_search_products' suggest this is part of a search system, but the description fails to provide necessary context for effective use.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with one parameter 'categoryId' documented as 'Category ID for facets'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, as it doesn't explain parameter usage (e.g., optional vs. required, default behavior if omitted) or provide examples. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Get facets and filters for search' states the action (get) and resource (facets and filters) with a clear purpose. However, it lacks specificity about what facets and filters are (e.g., product attributes for filtering search results) and doesn't distinguish it from siblings like 'vtex_search_products' or 'vtex_autocomplete', which are related to search functionality.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a search context), exclusions, or compare it to siblings like 'vtex_search_products' (which might return actual products) or 'vtex_autocomplete' (which might suggest search terms). The description implies a search-related use but offers no explicit context.

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