search_pricing

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes a search operation, which implies read-only and non-destructive behavior. However, it does not explicitly state safety or side-effect guarantees, but the nature of search is clear.

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 with a brief introductory sentence followed by a clear bullet list of parameters. Every sentence adds value and is well-structured for quick comprehension.

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?

Given the 5 parameters and no schema descriptions, the description covers all parameters and provides usage context. It references an output schema (though not shown), so return values need not be explained. Complete for a search tool with good sibling differentiation.

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%, but the description adds meaning by explaining each parameter: provider (with example values), query (with examples), domain, region, and max_results (with default). This compensates fully for the missing 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 it's a free-text search across the pricing catalog, distinguishes itself from get_price by noting it's useful before calling that tool, and provides examples. This differentiates it from siblings like compare_prices or get_price.

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?

Explicitly says when to use: for exploring SKUs before get_price or for services not covered by a specific domain. Implicitly suggests not for exact price lookups (handled by get_price). Provides clear context with sibling references.

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