get_recommended_products

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world. Description adds value by explicitly noting that it only selects from existing products and does not fabricate new items or prices, reinforcing the closed-world hint.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff. Front-loaded with purpose and key constraints. Every sentence earns its place.

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 complexity (6 params, no output schema) and rich annotations, the description covers the core recommendation logic. Could mention result ordering or pagination behavior for completeness but not strictly necessary.

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 covers 5 of 6 parameters with descriptions; limit is missing. Tool description enumerates some parameters (tastes, occasion, people_count, budget_cents, store_id) but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 appropriate for high coverage.

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?

Description clearly states 'recommend products by taste and scenario' and specifies it selects from existing products. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_product_catalog (list all) and get_store_inventory (stock).

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?

Description implies usage context (taste, occasion, people, budget, store) but doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use. Siblings offer alternative purposes, providing some implicit guidance.

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