run_capterra_products_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the credit cost ('1 point per returned record'), which is real context beyond structured data, but says nothing about pagination, return format, or auth/permission requirements for a search operation.

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?

A single tight sentence that front-loads the action, the resource, the returned fields, and the cost. Every clause earns its place with no filler.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description does well to name the returned fields and the per-record cost, but it omits pagination/limit behavior and any note on result ordering or filtering scope, leaving the agent with a partially complete picture.

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 100%, so both query and max_items are fully documented in the schema; the description adds only the informal 'by keyword' framing and nothing about max_items or the 250 cap. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 (Search) and resource (Capterra software products) and adds the returned fields (name, rating, review count, image), so an agent can distinguish it from generic search tools. It does not, however, differentiate from the nearby run_capterra_category_products or run_capterra_products_reviews siblings, so it falls short of a 5.

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 phrase 'by keyword' implies the input mode but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no routing to alternatives such as run_capterra_product (single product) or run_capterra_category_products (category-scoped listing). An agent must infer when this is the right entry point.

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