Search Home Depot Canada

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 return fields (SKU, name, brand, etc.) and pagination behavior, but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or safe, nor does it mention error conditions, rate limits, or authentication needs. The implied read-only nature of 'search' is reasonable but not explicit.

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 two concise sentences. The first sentence states the purpose and lists return fields; the second provides a key usage hint. Every word contributes value with no 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?

Given the lack of an output schema, the description adequately lists return fields (SKU, name, brand, model, price, rating, online stock, URL, image) and mentions total count, filters, and sort options. It covers pagination with `page`. Missing details on error handling or defaults, but sufficient for a typical search tool.

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 covers all 6 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the description adds minimal value beyond schema. It provides a pagination hint ('Use `page` to paginate'), which is mildly helpful but not essential. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema carries the load.

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 it searches Home Depot Canada for products by keyword, providing a specific verb and resource. It lists the return fields (SKU, name, brand, etc.), distinguishing it from sibling tools like hd_product (single product details) and hd_stores (store info).

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 specifies when to use the tool: to search for products by keyword. It mentions pagination with `page`, implying its use for browsing. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives among siblings, though the sibling names are distinct enough to infer.

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