run_newegg_products_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose a meaningful cost trait ('1 point per returned record'), but omits read-only nature, pagination behavior, and any auth/rate-limit context. The cost signal is genuine added value, but the disclosure is incomplete.

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 compact sentences with the core action front-loaded and the pricing note appended. Little waste, though the trailing sort phrase is both inaccurate and the weakest part of the sentence.

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 straightforward search tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is adequate on purpose but thin on routing and behavioral context. The cost note helps, but usage guidance and sibling differentiation are missing.

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 100%, so the baseline would be 3. However, the description's sort framing ('price, rating, seller and stock') does not match the actual enum (lowest/highest price, best selling, best rating, most reviews) – 'seller and stock' are not sort options, so it risks misleading rather than clarifying.

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 (Newegg products) with the primary constraint (by keyword). It distinguishes by marketplace but does not differentiate itself from the sibling run_newegg_products (the non-search variant) or the many other marketplace search tools, so it stops 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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternatives are named despite a crowded neighborhood of Newegg siblings (run_newegg_products, run_newegg_categories_products, run_newegg_products_reviews). The agent gets no routing help.

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