List Offers

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

With readOnlyHint and openWorldHint already set, the description adds substantial behavior: 60-second cache, integer rial prices, unknown values remain unknown, out-of-stock offers retained, observed_at semantics, and no login/cart mutation/seller API. This is well beyond annotation coverage and does not contradict them.

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 core operation is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the remaining sentences deliver useful caveats without obvious repetition. It is slightly dense but appropriately sized for the number of behavioral constraints.

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 an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values. It covers caching, coverage limits, price and stock semantics, timestamp meaning, and side-effect boundaries, leaving no major gap for calling this read-only offer list correctly.

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%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It explains that variant_id is an optional exact-match filter and that IDs come from get_product/search and should not be substituted, but it does not fully document product_id or format details beyond the schema's pattern.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Read seller offers') plus caching scope and optional variant matching. It distinguishes itself from broader seller tools by limiting coverage to offers in the current product response and warning against substituting sellers or similar variants.

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?

It gives clear usage context: IDs must come from get_product/search results, and variant_id must be an exact match, not a seller or similar variant. It also sets a coverage boundary by noting this is not all possible sellers, though it does not explicitly name compare_offers or list_product_sellers as alternatives.

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