Shop Catalog View

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does this well by stating the operation is a display/view: 'Show' and 'Displays every available product with thumbnail, name, price, and stock/sale status.' It does not explicitly declare side-effect freedom or data freshness, but the view-oriented language and browsable-grid framing make the read-only nature clear enough.

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 sentences, each earning its place: action and resource, displayed content, and alternative routing. The most important scoping information is front-loaded, and there is no filler or repetition of schema fields.

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 simple, read-only grid view with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It tells the agent what the tool does, what it displays, when to use it, and which siblings handle related but different intents. No critical information needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 50%: the search parameter is well documented in the schema, while lang is not described at all. The tool description reinforces the 'full catalog' behavior and implies search filtering by saying it shows the full catalog, but it does not explain the lang parameter or add meaning beyond the schema. This is adequate but leaves a gap for one parameter.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Show the full konsum.aare.guru merchandise catalog as a browsable grid.' It further specifies what is displayed (thumbnail, name, price, stock/sale status), making the tool's purpose unmistakable. It also contrasts with detail-oriented siblings by pointing to get_shop_product / product_view, so an agent can distinguish this from related tools.

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 description gives explicit trigger phrasings: 'what merch is there?' or 'show me the shop' questions. It also names alternatives for adjacent intents: get_shop_product / product_view for one item, and create_checkout_session to start a purchase. This is clear when-to-use versus when-to-use-something-else guidance.

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