Find brand

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavior: the empty-result meaning (site spells the brand differently) and the recovery path through tl_search. This is a meaningful disclosure beyond annotations.

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 short paragraphs, front-loaded with the purpose, then the usage routing. No filler sentences. Slightly dense but each clause carries actionable information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description wisely focuses on how to use brand_code and brand_page downstream. For a one-parameter lookup tool it covers the important failure mode and routing. Could mention nothing further it critically lacks.

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 schema itself documents the Persian-name requirement with examples. The description reinforces the input semantics by stating the name must be the Persian site spelling and demonstrates the mismatch problem. It adds context but doesn't need to restate the parameter, so it sits slightly above the schema baseline.

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: look up a brand by its Persian name, returning filter code and brand page. Clear purpose, though the distinction from tl_search is implied rather than sharply drawn. It is a lookup helper rather than the search itself.

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 tells the agent where the returned values go (brand_codes in tl_search/tl_find_cheapest/tl_category_products, brand_page in tl_category_products) and gives an exact fallback for the empty-list case, naming tl_search and the `brands` facet. When-to-use and alternatives are both concrete.

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