run_walmart_product_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It does disclose a useful non-schema behavior: '1 point per returned record,' which tells the agent cost scales with result count. It does not disclose pagination behavior (start_page exists), rate limits, or result shape, leaving gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the search purpose front-loaded before the cost note. Efficient, though slightly terse for a 6-parameter tool.

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 full schema coverage and no output schema, the description need not restate parameters, but it could say more about result counts, paging, or return shape. The cost note is helpful but the definition remains thin for a search endpoint with paging and sorting.

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 every parameter (sort, keyword, max_items, max_price, min_price, start_page) is already documented in the schema with enums and ranges. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond that baseline, so a 3 is appropriate.

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 (Walmart products) scoped by keyword, and names the data surface (title, price, rating, seller). It is clearly a Walmart retail search, distinguishable from the dozens of sibling retailer searches by the retailer name. However, it does not explicitly contrast with close siblings like run_walmart_product or run_walmart_seller_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?

Usage is only implied by the name and description: use it to find Walmart products by keyword. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or pointer to alternative tools such as run_walmart_product for a single item or run_amazon_product_search for a different retailer. Minimum viable for a self-explanatory search tool.

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