Search Canadian Tire

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return fields (SKU, name, price, stock, etc.), total count, filters, and sort options, implying read-only behavior. No side effects are mentioned, but the description is sufficient for understanding the tool's behavior.

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 sentences: purpose, return fields, and special behavior. It is front-loaded with the main action, and every sentence adds necessary information without fluff.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the main functionality: search, pagination, category redirects, and return fields. It could mention error handling or rate limits, but it is complete enough for typical use.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds value beyond the schema: it explains how to use 'page' for pagination and describes the 'categoryRedirectUrl' field. This provides meaningful context on usage.

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 clearly states 'Search Canadian Tire... for products by keyword.' The verb is specific (search), the resource is defined (Canadian Tire products), and it distinguishes from sibling tools (ct_product for single product, ct_store_availability for stock, ct_stores for store list).

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 explains how to use it: search by keyword, paginate with 'page', and notes category redirect behavior. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives (e.g., use ct_product for specific product details), but the context is clear.

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