sf_search_products

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's '[READ-ONLY]' tag adds no new safety info. The description does mention the tool uses SOSL and returns specific fields, but it does not disclose potential side effects, rate limits, or permission requirements. This is acceptable given the annotations cover the safety profile.

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 concise overall, with two paragraphs and key information front-loaded. The '[INSTRUCTIONS]' tag is unnecessary and adds noise, but it does not significantly detract from clarity. Every other sentence earns its place.

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 search tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains return fields (name, code, family, description, active status) and usage context (product catalog, price book linkage). It could be slightly improved by mentioning pagination or ordering, but it is complete enough for an AI agent to understand and invoke the tool.

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 coverage is 100% with both parameters described ('Product name or product code' for query, 'Maximum results (default: 20)' for limit). The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, which is adequate.

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 queries Product2 sObjects via SOSL and returns specific fields (name, code, family, description, active status). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like sf_products_by_family (filter by family) and sf_update_product (update), providing a specific verb and resource.

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 provides clear usage context: 'Use when the user asks about product catalog, wants to find a specific product, or needs product IDs for orders.' It explains how products relate to price books. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives, which would improve guidance.

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