Find discounted Alza products

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/openWorld/idempotent annotations: discloses the bounded sample size (up to 3 pages ≈ 72 cards), the candidatesScanned signal, Czech-only store with errors on other locales, shelf price vs coupon price, and that discount is computed rather than read from badges. This is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose in the first sentence, then adds limitations. It is dense and relies on long parenthetical clauses, but nearly every clause carries useful constraint information, so little is wasted.

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 values need no explanation, and the description fully covers the non-obvious constraints (bounded coverage, locale restriction, price type). An agent can call this correctly and interpret the result without further context.

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 100%, so limit, category_id and min_discount_percent are already documented with defaults and bounds. The description reiterates category_id behavior (top-level hubs return nothing, popular-category fallback) without adding syntax beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 specific verb+resource ('Find currently discounted products on Alza.cz') and enumerates the returned data (current price, original price, savings, computed discount %). It is clearly distinguishable from search_products and get_product, which do not target discounts.

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?

Explains the operative context (no 'sale' facet exists, so it scans category listings) and how to drive it (pass a category_id from list_categories/search_products, or omit it to scan popular categories). It never explicitly routes to a sibling alternative, but the discounted-only scope makes the boundary clear.

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