search-cellar

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond the annotations: the region parameter fans out across Country, Region, SubRegion, Appellation, and Locale, and results are capped at 25 per page with offset paging. It does not state sort order, which is a minor omission.

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 sentences, zero filler, front-loaded with the core purpose followed by the non-obvious region semantics and pagination rule. Every sentence carries information an agent would otherwise have to guess.

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 an output schema present, the description needn't explain return values, and it does not over-explain them while still noting the page size. The main gap is the absence of guidance on how results are ordered, which matters for a paginated tool where an agent may page through many results.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning the schema lacks: it clarifies that region searches across five distinct nested fields, which the terse schema text ('Region, country, or appellation') does not convey. That elevates it above the schema-only 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?

The description gives a specific verb (Search) and resource (your wine cellar) and enumerates the filterable dimensions (name, color, region, varietal, location, vintage range). It is very clear what the tool does, though it never names an alternative sibling such as bottle-details, so it stops short of explicit sibling differentiation.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb and the filter list, and paging via offset is explained, but there is no statement of when to prefer this over bottle-details or cellar-stats, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. A reader infers the context rather than being told it.

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