prom_search_url

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does useful disclosure work: it tells the agent there is no auth requirement and no network/page fetching, so no side effects occur. It omits whether the returned URL is fully qualified or how it should be presented, but the key safety profile is covered.

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 short sentences with zero filler; the core action is front-loaded and the credential/access disclaimer follows immediately. Every clause earns its place.

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 single-parameter, no-output-schema URL builder, the definition explains purpose and the no-auth/no-fetch behavior adequately. The remaining gap is the shape of the produced URL, which is minor but would help an agent present the result.

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?

One parameter at 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. It only says the URL is built 'for a query', which adds no encoding rules, language expectations, or filter semantics beyond the schema's plain 'query' string.

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 ('Build a Prom.ua marketplace search URL') plus the input ('for a query'). It implicitly separates itself from siblings like prom_search_products by clarifying that it constructs a link rather than retrieving data, though it never names the alternative explicitly.

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 clauses 'requires no API credentials' and 'performs no automated page access' imply the intended context (produce a human-clickable link instead of querying the marketplace), but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statement and no sibling is named. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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