Compare Product Sellers

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 genuinely useful behavior beyond that: a 60-second snapshot cache, inclusion of seller metrics, and the caveat that unknown shipping blocks a cheapest-delivered-total claim.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core operation and constraints, then the caveats. Nothing is padded, though the color/size/warranty sentence is advice rather than definition.

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, return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. The description supplies the input constraints, cache freshness, and the shipping caveat, leaving only the sibling-disambiguation gap.

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 description coverage is 0% and the schema has a nested object, so the description must carry the load. It does: it confirms 2–6 offer IDs (matching minItems/maxItems) and that all IDs must belong to a single product, adding real meaning the schema cannot express.

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 (compare) and resource (product sellers/offers), names the source tool list_product_sellers, and pins the input to 2–6 exact offer IDs for one product. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the very similar sibling compare_offers, which is the main gap.

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?

Gives a clear prerequisite (offer IDs must come from list_product_sellers) and a soft usage hint (compare color/size and warranty before price). It stops short of stating when to use this over compare_offers or when not to use it at all, leaving the key routing decision to inference.

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