Search groceries

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral value that annotations cannot: results include closed stores and cap at ~5 matching products per store, which shapes how the agent should interpret and present output.

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 the core action and scope, then result shape, then the routing alternative. No filler or repetition of the 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?

For a read-only search with an output schema and 100% schema coverage, the description covers scope, result shape and sibling routing adequately. Pagination behavior across page/limit is left entirely to the schema, which is acceptable given the output schema exists.

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%, with lat/long ranges, Persian query guidance and page/limit constraints all documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 with scope: search a grocery product across ALL SnappMarket stores delivering to a given point. It explicitly separates itself from the sibling market_find_cheapest, so an agent can route 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 a positive use case ('see which stores carry an item and at what price') and names the alternative tool with the condition that selects it ('for a single flat cheapest-first list use market_find_cheapest instead'). Explicit when-to-use and when-to-use-something-else.

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