get_price_stats

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that statistics are computed from the 60 cheapest matching listings sorted ascending, which helps an agent understand potential skew, and notes 'One polite request' about request behavior. It doesn't address rate limits or errors, but for a read-only stats tool this is reasonably transparent.

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, focused sentence followed by a short note. It front-loads the purpose and then lists computed values and methodology. The 'One polite request' fragment is slightly ambiguous but not bloated.

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 10-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description explains the core computation and output fields, which is essential. However, it omits how unspecified parameters behave, what the response structure looks like beyond the stats list, and the meaning of the 'polite request' note. Some gaps remain.

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?

The description adds no per-parameter meaning. Schema covers 70% of parameters, leaving year, condition, and countries without descriptions, and the tool description does not compensate or clarify how filters affect the statistics. It only refers to 'matching listings' generically.

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 clearly states the tool computes price statistics (min, percentiles, max, sample size) for watches across Chrono24. Although it uses a noun phrase rather than a verb, the function is unambiguous. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like search_listings, but the aggregated-statistics deliverable is distinct.

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 is given on when to call this tool compared to search_listings, get_watch, or get_dealer_listings. The description only says what the tool returns, not when it is the right choice. There is no mention of alternatives or exclusions.

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