search_products

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the authentication requirement and the data source, which is useful context beyond the schema. It does not mention behavior such as response shape, errors, or rate limits, though an output schema exists to cover the return format.

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 short sentences with no filler: purpose first, then authentication, then an exclusion. Every clause earns its place and the most identifying fact (GTIN lookup from True API) is front-loaded.

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?

For a one-parameter lookup with an output schema, the description covers purpose, auth, and a key limitation. The main gap is the lack of disambiguation from sibling tools, particularly get_product_info, which may overlap in purpose. This leaves tool selection partially incomplete.

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 100%; the input schema already documents query as a 14-digit GTIN and warns that name/brand search is outside the API. The tool description only restates this same information without adding any new parameter-level semantics, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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's first phrase 'Информация о товаре по GTIN из True API' gives a specific operation: look up product information by GTIN from a specific API. It also explicitly excludes name/brand search, but it does not differentiate from the sibling get_product_info, so an agent may still be unsure which product-info tool to choose.

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 states the prerequisite CHESTNYZNAK_TOKEN and gives an explicit when-not-to-use condition: name/brand searching requires the National Catalog outside the API. However, it does not point to any sibling tool as an alternative, so the guidance is clear but not fully tied to the available toolset.

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