Get Closeout

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

Annotations cover the read-only/idempotent/safe profile, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: the renew-vs-transfer pricing rationale, the `available: false` sentinel meaning, and the warning not to quote the search `price`. This is exactly the non-obvious behavior an agent cannot infer from structured fields.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose in the first clause, then layers contract, rationale, and sentinel meaning. Dense and mostly waste-free, though the pricing explanation sentence is long and slightly hard to parse in one reading.

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 no output schema, the description correctly takes on return-value explanation: it defines `totalPrice` and `available`, and warns that `totalPrice` (not the search `price`) is user-facing. Nothing needed to call and use the result correctly is missing.

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% with a single documented `domain` parameter, so the schema carries the load. The description references `cost_cents` (a parameter of the sibling `buy_closeout`, not this tool) and adds no syntax or format detail for `domain`; baseline 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 (get) and resource (one closeout), and immediately qualifies it with the derived `totalPrice` field that makes the tool distinct. An agent can distinguish it from `search_closeouts` and `buy_closeout` without opening any schema.

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?

Explicit sequencing rule: 'Always call this before buy_closeout' plus the exact contract (pass totalPrice as `cost_cents`). It also explains why search results are insufficient, and gives an exclusion condition (`available: false` means already claimed).

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