search_products

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds one useful detail ('Prices returned in RUBLES') but does not mention pagination behavior, result structure, or confirm that it is a read-only operation. The search intent implies non-destructive behavior, but more transparency would be needed for a higher score.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the core purpose, and wastes no words. It conveys the essential function and the key currency detail in minimal space.

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?

The tool has 4 optional parameters and no output schema, but the description only provides the core search purpose and currency information. It does not disclose what fields are returned or any response structure, leaving the agent partially uninformed. However, for a straightforward search tool, it is minimally adequate.

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 has 100% description coverage for all four parameters (limit, offset, search, filter_article), so the baseline is 3. The description's phrase 'by name or article' aligns with the 'search' and 'filter_article' parameters but does not add new meaning beyond the schema descriptions.

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 the tool's function: 'Search products in MoySklad by name or article.' This specifies the verb (search), resource (products), and search criteria (name/article), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_variants or search_bundles.

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 implies the tool is for product searches but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives such as search_assortment or search_variants. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name and description.

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