browse_catalog

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

The description discloses the return value (merchant's artifact and payment receipt) and mentions the payment mechanism (USDC over x402), which is useful. However, the phrases 'Free at the merchant' and 'Costs free per call, paid in USDC over x402' are internally contradictory about whether the call involves payment, causing ambiguity.

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 short and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, 'Free at the merchant' and 'Costs free per call' are redundant, and the payment wording could be tightened without losing meaning.

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 one-optional-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides enough scope: what is returned, the cost/payment context, and the listing focus. However, the term 'artifact' is vague and the payment ambiguity is not resolved, leaving minor gaps.

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% for the single 'rail' parameter, and its schema description already explains the enum values and default 'auto'. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate for 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 clearly states the action ('List'), the target resource ('a storefront's items'), and the key details ('with prices and buy routes'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like buy_item (which purchases) and list_commerce_tools (which likely lists tools).

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 this is for browsing a catalog before purchasing, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like buy_item or list_commerce_tools. It gives context about cost and payment but lacks direct usage guidance.

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