Bangladesh buying terms

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description adds substantial behavior beyond them: the exact payload returned, that live catalogue terms may add fields like payment_methods and vat_bps, that those terms are not a locked quote, and the degraded path where live_terms_unavailable=true still returns the base guide with an instruction not to invent fees.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and its trigger, then the return shape, then failure mode, then routing. It is dense and long-ish for a no-arg getter, but nearly every clause carries decision-relevant information; only minor trimming would be possible.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields, the conditional live-terms block, and the degraded fallback. An agent has everything needed to call it and interpret both success and partial-success responses.

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?

Zero parameters makes the baseline 4, and the description reinforces it by telling the agent to call with an empty object {} and explicitly warning that no currency, region, account or order arguments are accepted – useful guardrails against hallucinated inputs.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Retrieve JOY Automart's Bangladesh purchasing and delivery guide') and scopes it to a market. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like search_parts or prepare_buyer_handoff because it explicitly names them as the tools for prices and handoff instead.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger ('before explaining payment, delivery or human handoff') and routes the agent onward: search_parts/get_part for prices/availability, then prepare_buyer_handoff for a selected part. It also states what this tool does NOT do (no payment, no message, no order), which removes ambiguity about alternatives.

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