get_cheapest_offers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the sort order, the exclusion of refurbished/open-box/outlet offers, the existence and meaning of `refurbished_hidden`, and the returned fields. It stops short of describing empty-result behavior or any limit/pagination semantics.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the payoff (cheapest offers, sort key) before the refinement clause on refurbished items. The parenthetical about `refurbished_hidden` earns its place by connecting the filter to a returned value.

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 enumerating the returned fields is bonus rather than necessity, and the filtering logic is fully covered. The one gap is `limit` — a 3-parameter tool where one parameter is undocumented in both schema and description.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It thoroughly explains include_refurbished (what it filters, what the count field means) but says nothing about `limit` (its default of 5, whether it caps results) and only implies product_id's meaning from context.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource ('cheapest current shop offers for a product') plus the sort key (total price = product + shipping) and the returned fields, so the agent knows exactly what it gets. It does not differentiate itself from the similarly named sibling find_cheapest, leaving the agent to infer which of the two to call.

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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use condition for include_refurbished ('only set that when the user explicitly asks for refurbished/outlet items'), which is a real behavioral guardrail. It offers no tool-level guidance about when to prefer this over find_cheapest or search_products, so alternative selection is left to inference.

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