Taobao Search

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

Beyond the readOnly/openWorld/idempotent annotations, the description discloses meaningful runtime behavior: the tool depends on Chrome/CDP, can hit a login wall requiring authentication in the scraping profile, and can fail with ParserDriftError when the DOM changes. These failure modes are valuable context for an agent deciding whether to invoke and how to react.

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 well-structured with a concise summary followed by clearly separated Return Format and Error Format sections. It avoids fluff, though the Return Format section is somewhat redundant given that an output schema exists.

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 two-parameter search tool, the description is complete: it states the resource, the browser rendering dependency, authentication prerequisite, output item shape, and the two key error modes. Combined with the rich annotations and full schema coverage, an agent has everything needed to invoke and troubleshoot this tool.

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%: query is documented with examples and length constraints, and page is documented with range and default. The description adds little to parameter semantics beyond the high-level 'search Taobao listings' statement, so the baseline of 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Search Taobao listings'. It also clarifies the execution context ('rendered in the operator's Chrome'), which distinguishes this from simple API-style searches and from sibling tools like taobao_card or taobao_selfcheck by function and marketplace.

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 implies the main use case—keyword search over Taobao listings—and gives operational context via the 'rendered in the operator's Chrome' note and the login-wall retry instruction. However, it never explicitly states when to prefer taobao_search over sibling tools like taobao_card, or when not to use it.

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