Home page offers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context: results are organized into sections and groups (theme, brand, skin concern) of cards with prices, plus featured brands, categories and magazine picks. It does not discuss caching or freshness of 'now', which is the only notable gap.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then return structure, then next steps. Every sentence carries information, though the middle sentence about sections/groups is somewhat dense and could be tightened.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must convey return shape, and it does: named sections, groups of product cards with prices, featured brands/categories, magazine picks. Combined with complete annotation coverage and a single optional parameter, an agent has enough to call this 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 coverage is 100% and the single param is documented as 'Products per group, 1-8'. The description adds meaning the schema lacks by explaining what a 'group' actually is ('a theme such as a brand or skin concern'), which makes the parameter interpretable rather than abstract.

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 ('Show what Darukade's home page promotes now') and enumerates the exact sections returned: golden offers, newest, best-selling, most-loved. An agent can distinguish this from dr_search or dr_categories without opening either 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 explicit trigger phrases ('what is on offer today', 'what is new') and routes the agent onward: dr_product for details, or dr_search with discounted=true and sort="discount" for the complete discount list. That is an explicit alternative with the condition that selects it.

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