Find shops

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and non-destructive behavior, so safety is covered. The description adds the useful fact that the lookup key can be either a name or a domain and that results are ids meant for follow-up tools, but says nothing about pagination, result caps, or empty-result behavior for a directory search.

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?

A single tight sentence with the action, data source, lookup keys, and return value front-loaded; there is no filler or redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description partially compensates by saying it returns ids for tb_shop and tb_shop_products, which is genuinely useful. But for a 5-parameter paginated search it omits pagination behavior and total-count semantics, so key operational details an agent needs are 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?

Schema coverage is 60%: query, city, and kind are documented in the schema, while page and limit have no descriptions. The description's 'by name or domain' restates the query parameter but adds no new semantic detail, and it does not compensate for the undocumented pagination parameters. 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 ('Find shops in Torob's directory') and the lookup key ('by name or domain'), plus names the downstream consumers (tb_shop, tb_shop_products). It does not disambiguate from close siblings like tb_stores or tb_sellers, so it falls short of a 5, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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 phrase 'returns ids for tb_shop and tb_shop_products' implicitly tells the agent this is a discovery/lookup step that should precede those calls. However, there is no explicit statement of when to use this instead of tb_stores, tb_sellers, or tb_search, and no exclusions or prerequisites.

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