generate_buyer_queries

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses the two-step process (discovers brand profile then writes query pack) and provides cost information. Does not mention authentication or rate limits, but these are less critical for a generative preview tool.

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?

Two sentences, each valuable. First sentence states action and process. Second sentence gives usage context and cost. No redundant information. Very concise.

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?

Given one parameter, no output schema, and siblings, the description provides enough context: what it does, when to use (before check_visibility), and cost. Lacks detail on output format (what a 'query pack' contains), but the tool is simple enough that this is acceptable.

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% (single parameter 'domain' fully described). Description adds only 'brand site' context, which is already implicit. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as no additional parameter meaning is needed beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states the tool generates buyer questions for a brand, with specific verb 'generate' and resource 'buyer questions'. It explicitly differentiates from sibling 'check_visibility' by noting it is used 'before a paid check_visibility run'.

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?

Provides explicit usage context: preview or seed prompts before a paid check_visibility run. Does not mention when not to use or alternatives like shopping_check or get_snapshot_diff, but gives clear and actionable guidance for its primary use case.

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