search_ikea

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that results require network access, reflect live listings, prices/currency vary by country/language, and returns an empty list on no matches. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema, though it doesn't cover potential errors or rate limits.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by behavioral details and edge cases. Every sentence adds value with no fluff or redundancy.

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 (4 params, scrape-based behavior, output schema exists), the description covers purpose, return format, network dependence, and empty-result behavior. It doesn't mention potential scraper brittleness or error cases, but the schema and output schema fill most gaps, making it largely complete.

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% coverage with detailed descriptions for each parameter. The description adds a bit of context (e.g., tying lang/country to live listings) but largely restates what the schema already conveys, so 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 states the tool 'Search IKEA's online catalog for furniture and home products' with a specific verb and resource, and mentions returning product dicts with fields. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_amazon or search_newegg by focusing on IKEA.

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 provides clear context on usage: it scrapes IKEA's live website, requires network access, and is per-country/language. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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