find_single_seller_brands

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds context that results are either gated/exclusive or operator-acquired brands, which provides insight into the nature of the output beyond the read-only flag.

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 sentences: first defines the core function, second gives usage examples. Every sentence is essential and no waste. Front-loaded with the most important information.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should hint at return format. It does not. With 13 parameters and complex filtering, the description is minimal but adequate given schema and annotations. Lacks clarity on output structure.

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 62%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any parameter-level information beyond the schema. It does not compensate for the undocumented parameters like limit, brand_contains, or min_control_score.

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 tool finds brands with a single operator controlling 100% buybox days, and gives example user queries. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like brand_buybox_trajectory or brand_under_attack.

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 specific example user queries ('brands with one seller', 'exclusive brands', etc.) and states when to use it. It lacks explicit exclusions or alternative tool suggestions, but the guidance is clear.

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