jev_extract_products

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

With no annotations, the description takes on full responsibility for disclosing side effects and limitations. It states it's read-only, best-effort, does not scroll/click/infer, and warns to verify important price/stock data. This is robust behavioral transparency for a DOM extraction tool.

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 sentences in the first paragraph plus three clauses in the second, front-loaded with the core action and followed by precondition and caveats. No filler; every clause contributes.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what is extracted, when to call it, and its limitations. It stops short of describing the exact return structure or behavior when no cards are visible, but the listed fields and caveats make it reasonably complete.

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 one required string parameter (session_id) and schema description coverage is 0%. The description never mentions session_id, its format, or its purpose, so it adds no meaning beyond the field name. For a tool with low schema coverage, this is a clear gap.

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 names a specific verb ('Extract'), a specific resource ('product name, price, rating, details, and link from currently visible product cards'), and scopes it to visible product cards, which separates it from the sibling tools (browse/status/stop). It is clearly not a navigation or status tool.

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 explicitly tells the agent to use this after jev_browse reaches a results or product page, and clarifies that it is best-effort read-only and does not scroll, click, or infer. This gives a clear precondition and implies when it is not suitable (when interaction or scrolling is needed), though it doesn't name an alternative tool explicitly.

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