find_stores

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds significant behavioral context: returns ranked list, explains empty string behavior for both parameters, details return fields, and mentions RuntimeError on unreachable directory. No contradiction.

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?

Well-structured with a clear purpose sentence, usage context, parameter descriptions in Args, and detailed return format. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. Efficient and complete.

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 two-parameter search tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: input semantics, output format, error handling, and usage context. No 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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains both parameters: query as free-text search, category as filter, and both default to empty strings with explained behavior. This completely compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 finds 'negotiate.v1-compliant stores' using a search query or category. It specifies the verb 'find' and resource 'stores', and differentiates from siblings by instructing to use it when no particular store is specified, then pass the domain to start_negotiation.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (shopper asks to negotiate but no specific store) and how to use (search by query/category, pick a store, pass domain to start_negotiation). Lacks explicit when-not or alternative tools, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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