DNS-Shop Search

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

Annotations already cover safety, but the description adds valuable behavior: it is rendered in the operator's Chrome, price_rub is None never 0, and specific error conditions (TransportDownError, ParserDriftError) are disclosed. This gives the agent realistic expectations beyond the structured hints.

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?

The description is compact and well-organized with clear Return Format and Error Format sections. Every sentence contributes useful information, and there is no filler or repetition of the title.

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 one-parameter search tool, the description covers the return shape, key data nuances, and failure modes. It is slightly incomplete only in that it omits any usage guidance relative to siblings, but the core calling context is well covered.

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%, and the schema already documents 'query' with an example. The description adds no further parameter-level detail, so the baseline of 3 applies without needing the description to compensate.

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 immediately states 'Search DNS-Shop', giving a specific verb and resource. The title and tool name reinforce this, and the resource is clearly distinct from sibling tools like dns_card or other marketplace searches, even without explicit contrast.

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 gives no guidance on when to use dns_search versus alternatives such as dns_card or compare_prices. There is no mention of what types of queries are appropriate or when to prefer another tool, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name.

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