subito_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool 'scrapes the results via Apify' without clarifying the scraping mechanism, potential delays (though timeoutSecs exists), rate limits, error behavior, or whether the operation is purely read-only. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond what a user could guess from the name and parameters.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action and key filtering dimensions. Every word carries meaning, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

The tool has 10 parameters and no output schema, yet the description omits details about the result format, pagination behavior, or what information each scraped ad provides. It also fails to explain the role of Apify (external dependency, potential costs) or the significance of the timeout parameter. For a complex search-and-scrape tool, this is insufficient context for an AI agent to reliably interpret results or handle edge cases.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions general parameter categories (keywords, category, region, etc.) but does not add semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter (e.g., how the price range interacts with sorting, or the relationship between region and query scope). The description is adequate but not enriching.

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 uses specific verbs ('Searches', 'scrapes') and identifies the resource ('Subito.it for ads'). It name-checks the key filtering dimensions (keywords, category, region, price range, shipping) and distinguishes the tool from siblings like subito_scrape_by_url (which handles URL-based scraping) and subito_get_dataset_items (which retrieves stored results).

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus the listed siblings. It implies general search usage but offers no explicit context for preferring subito_search over subito_scrape_by_url or apify_check_status, nor does it mention any prerequisites or limitations.

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