search_products

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 only describes the search action and filters, but does not mention that the operation is read-only, whether authentication is required, rate limits, pagination behavior, or what the return response looks like. For a search tool, these are important behavioral traits.

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 concise sentence that clearly communicates the core purpose. There is no redundant information, and it is front-loaded with the main action.

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?

While the schema fully documents parameters, the description lacks any information about the response format (e.g., list of items) or behavior like default result limits. Since there is no output schema, the description should compensate by explaining what the tool returns, but it does not.

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 all parameters are already documented in the schema. The description summarizes filters for price, condition, and sort order, which aligns with the schema but adds no additional meaning. It also omits mention of max_results, though the schema covers it.

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 uses the imperative 'Search' with a specific resource 'eBay products' and lists optional filters, making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It is distinct from sibling tools like place_bid, get_item_details, and track_shipment, which serve different 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 states it is for searching eBay by keyword with filters, implying use when finding products. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling context makes the use case clear. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it (e.g., when needing item details, get_item_details would be appropriate).

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