Current deals

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the safety burden is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: result ordering by discount size and the expectation that most discounts sit around 10%, which shapes how an agent interprets empty or thin results.

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 tight lines with the core action and ordering front-loaded, followed by usage triggers and the optional category constraint. No filler and nothing restating the tool name or title.

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?

Only two optional parameters, an output schema that covers return values, and rich annotations covering safety semantics. The description supplies the remaining gaps (ordering, use cases, category source), so an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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 100% and both parameters already carry examples ('hair-shampoo', 'sunscreen') and bounds, so the baseline is 3. The description's contribution is the cross-tool routing hint that the slug comes from ab_categories, which is mildly useful but largely duplicative of 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the discounted in-stock products'), adds ordering ('biggest discount first') and an anchor to the site's known page, so an agent can distinguish it from ab_search and ab_find_cheapest without opening schemas.

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 names the triggering intents ('what's on sale', 'discounted sunscreens') and points to ab_categories as the source of the optional category slug. It stops short of stating when NOT to use it versus ab_search or ab_find_cheapest, which would be needed for a 5.

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