Find shops

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-structured context: the data universe is Shopino shops including Instagram shops, and each result carries rating, buyer-survey count, followers and product count. It does not discuss pagination or result limits, which is the only real 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource before the routing advice. The second sentence packs several downstream tool references and an example, which is dense but each clause carries routing value.

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?

With an output schema present and 100% parameter coverage, the description only needs to establish the discovery role, the data scope, and downstream consumers — all of which it does. Minor omission: no note on pagination semantics or result-set size limits.

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 every parameter (city, query, gender, category_group, order, page, limit) is already documented in the schema with examples. The description restates the same filter fields without adding syntax or interaction rules, so it sits at the baseline 3.

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+resource ('Find Shopino shops') and enumerates the filterable dimensions (name, category group, gender, courier city) plus the returned attributes, so the agent knows exactly what surface this tool covers. It also names the sibling tools it feeds (sh_shop, sh_browse, sh_search), which cleanly separates it from them.

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 says when to use it: to obtain a shop_id for sh_shop / sh_browse(shop_id=...) / sh_search(shop_id=...), and gives a worked example ('best-known women's clothing shops with delivery in Tehran' → order='most_followed'). It stops short of excluding the other discovery siblings (sh_filters, sh_categories, sh_brands), so the routing is clear but not fully disambiguated.

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