run_olx_offers

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 a pricing trait ('5 point per returned record'), which is real value an agent cannot get from structured fields, but it omits auth requirements, rate limits, and failure behavior for an invalid id or URL.

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 dense sentence front-loads the operation and its scope, then lists the return payload and the cost. Nothing is padded or repeated.

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 2-parameter lookup with no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned fields and the credit cost. The only notable gap is that the optional 'domain' marketplace selector is never mentioned in prose, leaving marketplace disambiguation entirely to the schema enum.

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 both the 'offer' id/URL semantics and the domain enum are already fully documented in the schema. The description restates the id-or-URL acceptance but adds no syntax or formatting detail beyond it, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('Get one OLX ad by id or URL') and enumerates the returned payload (price, description, location with coordinates, photos, attributes, seller). The word 'one' plus the id/URL input distinguishes it from the sibling run_olx_offers_search without needing to open either 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?

The singular lookup framing implies the usage context and implicitly contrasts with run_olx_offers_search, but the description never explicitly names the alternative or states when to prefer this single-record fetch. No prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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