Shop reviews

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: newest-first ordering, rating range 1-5, inclusion of staff replies, Jalali dates, and a data-freshness caveat that reviews may be years old.

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?

Three short sentences with no filler; the core purpose and the sibling disambiguation are front-loaded, and the data caveat is placed last where it belongs.

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?

Because an output schema exists, return values need no explanation, and the description covers the ordering, rating scale, and the notable Jalali/freshness quirks. It is essentially complete for a simple read tool, with only minor room for more pagination guidance.

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%, so both page and limit are fully documented in the schema, giving a baseline of 3. The description only echoes the 'newest first' ordering already present in the page parameter and adds no syntax or edge-case detail beyond the schema.

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 (Read) and resource (customer reviews of the Technolife shop itself), with explicit scope (service, delivery). It directly distinguishes itself from the sibling tl_reviews, 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 an explicit selection rule: use this to judge the shop rather than a product, and names the alternative (tl_reviews) for the product case. When-to-use and when-not-to-use are both stated.

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