marketplace_compare_tools

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the core function but does not mention read-only nature, potential side effects, output format, or error behavior. The description adds no context beyond the obvious purpose.

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 a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded and contains no redundant information. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient.

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 simple comparison tool with one parameter, the description is minimally viable but lacks details about what 'key metrics' are included and what the response format looks like. Without an output schema, this information would be valuable for the agent to set expectations.

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?

The schema covers the sole parameter (toolIds) with a clear description and constraints (2-5 tools). The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond 'multiple tools', so the baseline of 3 applies due to high schema coverage.

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 'Compare multiple tools side-by-side with key metrics' clearly states the action (compare) and resource (multiple tools), and the phrase 'side-by-side' distinguishes it from sibling tools like marketplace_get_tool (single tool) and marketplace_discover_tools (discovery/list). The purpose is specific and aligned with the tool name.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or scenarios where another marketplace tool would be more appropriate. The usage context is only implied by the name and parameter schema.

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