Compare Grocery Choices

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

Annotation Contradiction: readOnlyHint=true suggests no state change, but the description says 'Create saved Lazada shortlists' and 'Drafts survive restarts,' implying persistent state is written. 'Nothing is added' does not fully reconcile this contradiction with the readOnlyHint annotation.

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 compact and front-loaded with usage context. Every sentence adds meaningful guidance, including persistence, expiry refresh behavior, and an error-handling caution. None of it is redundant filler.

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 description provides useful operational details like draft persistence, price refresh after expiresAt, and the next-step tool. However, the contradiction with annotations and the lack of parameter-level guidance leave gaps in the full calling context, especially given zero schema description coverage.

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 compensate for items and limit_per_item. It only hints at 'missing quantity/quality questions' and doesn't clarify the item object fields, limits, or limit_per_item behavior. This is insufficient for low schema coverage.

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 identifies the tool's function: creating saved Lazada shortlists with product comparison details. It also names its downstream sibling, render_product_picker, and distinguishes its scope ('ambiguous items, lists, and comparisons') from the other sibling tools.

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 explicitly states when this tool is preferred and instructs the agent to follow up with render_product_picker. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it versus alternatives like search_products or get_product, but the preference context is strong enough for selecting this tool.

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