willys_find_stores

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

The description discloses that it reads from a local cache of 254 stores, which is a meaningful behavioral trait given no annotations. However, it does not mention potential staleness of the cache, error conditions, or any side effects. This partial transparency warrants a middle score.

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 two-sentence description is efficiently front-loaded, with no filler. Every word contributes to the core purpose or the cache behavior.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is quite sparse. It omits return format, pagination, and how limit interacts with results. The cache note adds context, but the overall completeness is limited.

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 covers query and onlyClickAndCollect, but the 'limit' parameter lacks a description. The description only reiterates the query field and does not explain limit or the boolean's effect beyond the schema. With 67% coverage and no added semantic value, it falls short.

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 'Slå upp butiker på ort, namn eller postnummer' clearly specifies the verb (look up), resource (stores), and search criteria. It implicitly differentiates from siblings like willys_get_store (specific ID) and willys_nearest_stores (location-based), but does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as willys_search or willys_nearest_stores. The description only states what the tool does, not when to prefer it, so it fails to provide usage context or exclusions.

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