prom_saved_search_run

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses execution behavior (direct Prom SSR with DuckDuckGo fallback), which tells the agent results may come from a secondary source, but it omits whether the operation is read-only, any rate limits, auth requirements, or failure modes.

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?

A single compact sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. No filler, though it is short enough that more clarifying detail could have been added without bloat.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the core action but leaves gaps on the id's origin, expected return shape, and safety profile, which matter for an unannotated tool.

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?

There is one required parameter (id) with 0% schema description coverage. The phrase 'locally saved Prom.ua search' implies id is the saved-search identifier (matching prom_saved_search_list output), but the description gives no format or sourcing detail beyond that inference.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Run a locally saved Prom.ua search') and adds an implementation detail (Prom SSR with DuckDuckGo fallback). It is clearly distinct from siblings like prom_saved_search_list/create/delete and prom_search_products, though it doesn't explicitly name what it is not.

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?

Usage is implied by the name and description: this runs an existing saved search identified by id, versus prom_search_products which presumably runs an ad-hoc query. No explicit when/when-not guidance or prerequisites are given.

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