n11_product_reviews

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

With no annotations the description carries the burden, and it discloses a genuinely non-obvious limitation: n11 does not server-render review bodies, so only author and rating come back. That pre-empts a false expectation about returned data; it says nothing about rate limits, failure modes, or ordering beyond "recent".

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-loaded with the purpose, then constraints, with no filler sentences. The parenthetical about server-rendering is slightly buried mid-sentence but earns its place by explaining the reduced payload.

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 two-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, everything an agent needs is present: identifier format, limit bounds, where to get the identifier, and what fields come back. Return-value documentation is largely redundant given the output schema, so no meaningful gap remains.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must supply the meaning, and it does: `product` accepts a full URL or site path containing "/urun/…", and `limit` is bounded 1..24 — a constraint absent from the schema, which only shows a default of 5. It doesn't say what happens when limit exceeds the available review count.

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 ("Recent customer reviews of one product") plus the exact payload ("reviewer and star rating"), which separates it from n11_product_detail and the other siblings. An agent knows immediately what this returns without opening the schema.

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?

Gives a clear workflow prerequisite: obtain the product identifier via n11_search first, and implies the tool is per-product rather than bulk. It stops short of stating when not to use it (e.g. versus n11_product_detail for rating aggregates or full descriptions), so no explicit exclusions.

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