Dealer inventory

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, and the description adds real behavior: a 100-ad ceiling on inventory and the important detail that 'Filters and sorting run on the fetched list', implying results are a post-fetch slice, not a server-wide filtered set. It also discloses the return payload (address/location plus compact ads) despite no output schema.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with what is listed and how much, then sequencing, then filtering behavior, then return shape. Nothing is redundant, though the final return-shape sentence could sit earlier for faster scanning.

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 7-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description supplies the missing pieces: the cap on results, where filters are applied, and the shape of the response. Remaining gaps (pagination beyond the 100-ad ceiling, whether the cap is fixed or limit-driven) are minor but real.

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 coverage is 86%, so the schema already documents sort, limit, query, year and price bounds. The description adds only one semantic point — that filtering/sorting applies to the fetched list — and says nothing about how the 100-ad cap interacts with limit or that price filters exclude ads without a price.

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 ads of one dealer (showroom)') plus a hard scope ('the dealer's whole inventory, up to the first 100 ads'). It explicitly contrasts with siblings ba_dealers (which yields the id) and ba_ad (single ad), so an agent can pick it without opening a schema.

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?

Gives a clear sequence ('use it after ba_dealers when the user wants to browse one showroom') and an alternative for detail ('call ba_ad for one'). It doesn't say when to prefer buyer-side browsing across dealers (ba_search) over a single showroom, so the exclusion side is only partially covered.

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