Search products

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real domain context beyond them — prices are USD per unit and FOB Sialkot — but says nothing about filter combination semantics (AND vs OR) or result ordering, which matter for a catalog search.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and scope, with no filler. The final 'All filters are optional' sentence is mildly redundant with the schema's required list but still useful to an agent planning an unfiltered call.

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?

An output schema exists, so return structure need not be explained, and the description covers catalog scope and price semantics. For a five-optional-parameter read-only search this is close to complete, with only filter-combination behavior unstated.

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 every parameter is already documented, including the query example and the 'see list_categories' hint for category. The description adds only the optionality note, which the schema's empty required list already conveys; baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('the Tarigri Surgical wholesale catalog'), plus a parenthetical scope of product lines (surgical, dental, orthopedic, ENT instruments). That is enough to separate it from get_product (single-item lookup) and list_categories, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

'All filters are optional' implies a no-argument call returns a broad listing and that filters can be combined, which is mild usage guidance. It never states when to prefer this over list_categories or get_product, nor any exclusion conditions.

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