Suggest products

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral detail beyond annotations: typeahead behavior, a maximum of 30 products, and the fact that no prices are returned.

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?

The description is three short sentences and front-loads the core behavior first, followed by usage and the alternative tool. Every sentence adds distinct routing or constraint information with no wasted text.

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?

Given the output schema, rich annotations, and 100% schema description coverage, the description provides everything an agent needs: purpose, scope, limit, exclusion of prices, downstream use, and the alternative for broader search. No necessary behavioral or routing context is missing.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for the single query parameter, including examples in Persian and English. The description reinforces that the input is a product name but adds no syntax, format, or constraint details beyond what the schema already provides, so this is the baseline adequate score.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: it turns a product name into Technolife product codes. It also distinguishes the tool from siblings by naming tl_product / tl_compare / tl_reviews as downstream consumers and tl_search as the alternative for prices, filters, and paging.

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?

The description explicitly says to use it to resolve a name into codes for specific sibling tools, and explicitly says to use tl_search instead for prices, filters, and paging. This gives a clear when-to-use and when-to-use-an-alternative rule.

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