compare_products

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It implies a read-only comparison operation and adds 'per-serving label facts' context, but does not explicitly disclose side effects, data sources, or behavior beyond the basic action. Since it is clearly a non-destructive comparison, a 3 is appropriate.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the verb, resource, and key constraint efficiently.

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 simplicity (one parameter, output schema present), the description covers the essential purpose and the minimum product count. No critical details are missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does by clarifying that the product_ids array must contain at least two product identifiers ('two or more products'), which is a critical constraint not visible in the schema. This adds meaningful semantic value.

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 the action (compare), the resource (products), and the specific scope (per-serving label facts). It naturally distinguishes from siblings like get_product (single product) and search_products (finding products).

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 use when comparing multiple products but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools exist and could be called out, but the verb 'compare' gives some contextual cue.

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