Search manufacturers

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

With readOnlyHint and openWorldHint already declared, the description adds useful behavioral detail beyond annotations: array filters are ANDed, MOQ filters exclude records with unknown MOQ, and country matching is limited to the primary country. It does not describe pagination or response fields in detail.

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 compact and front-loaded, starting with what the tool does and then giving the most important filtering constraints. Every sentence adds actionable information without repeating the schema.

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?

For a 13-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description supplies the key filter semantics and prerequisite guidance an agent needs to call it correctly. It does not fully explain return fields or pagination, but the core invocation context is covered.

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 low at 38%, but the description compensates by explaining the most consequential semantics: AND behavior for array filters, MOQ exclusion behavior, and primary-country matching. It still leaves conventional parameters such as limit and offset without added meaning.

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 states a specific verb and resource: search manufacturers using free text and structured filters, returning a compact shortlist. It distinguishes the result shape from a detail or comparison tool, but does not explicitly name the sibling tools it differs from.

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?

It gives clear usage context: call get_facets first when unsure which countries, categories, or certifications exist, and it explains important filter behavior. It lacks explicit guidance on when to choose compare_manufacturers or get_manufacturer instead.

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