search_listings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly discloses pagination ('up to 60 cards per page'), the exact field set returned, and the shortlist-level scope ('without fetching details'). This gives the agent a concrete model of what the call will produce, even though it does not discuss sort defaults or empty-result behavior.

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?

Two tight sentences with no filler. The verb and resource are front-loaded, and the second sentence earns its place by describing return shape and intended use. Nothing extraneous is present.

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?

There is no output schema, so describing the returned card fields is essential and the description does so. It also communicates pagination and the shortlisting purpose. Given the rich parameter schema that already documents every parameter, the description covers the main gaps without needing to repeat schema details.

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 input schema has 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3 and the description does not need to add much. The description adds no real parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already documents, such as the meaning of query, facets, or limit. Thus it neither helps nor hurts beyond the schema.

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 action and resource: 'Search Chrono24 watch listings.' It also enumerates the returned fields, making clear this is a listing-level search tool. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like get_dealer_listings or get_watches, so it stops short of a 5.

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 phrase 'enough to shortlist without fetching details' implies a search/shortlisting use case, giving some context. However, it does not state when to prefer this tool over get_dealer_listings, get_watches, find_models, or list_filters, nor does it give any when-not-to-use guidance.

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