search_inventory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes what the tool does (search) and the return payload (list of matching vehicles with stock numbers, prices, mileage, links), which effectively communicates a read-only search operation with no side effects. It does not disclose pagination, rate limits, or prerequisites, but for a search tool this is adequate.

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 concise sentences that front-load the core purpose, then list filters and return content. No redundant words or repetition of schema details. 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?

For a search tool with 8 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It explains the resource, the filters, and the return fields. It doesn't cover edge cases like default behavior or sort order, but it provides enough context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly and understand the response.

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 covers all 8 parameters with descriptions, and the tool description echoes most of them ('make, model, year range, price range, location'). However, the description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema—for instance, it doesn't clarify format nuances or defaults. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is 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 clearly states 'Search CarMax inventory for used vehicles' with a specific verb and resource, and lists the available filter dimensions. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_vehicle_details, which focuses on details for a specific vehicle, and schedule_test_drive/get_instant_offer, which are unrelated actions.

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 description implies when to use this tool—when searching for used vehicles that match certain criteria—and provides a clear context. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the sibling tools are sufficiently different that an agent can infer the appropriate use case.

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