asin_discover

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure, but it does not state whether the operation is read-only, whether it has side effects (e.g., caching, rate limits), or what happens on failure. Mentions of 'override sweetspot' hint at internal logic but do not provide meaningful transparency.

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 paragraphs plus a brief arg list. Every sentence is purposeful: it states the core action, parameter semantics, and a clear usage cue. No fluff or repetition.

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 gives solid parameter details and usage guidance, but it does not explain the return value or output format, which matters given there is no output schema. It also omits edge cases (e.g., empty markets list, invalid JSON). Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 description explains every parameter beyond the schema: markets_json source and tier shortcuts, price overrides, reviews_max default (150), and fba_only behavior. Since schema coverage is 0%, this fully compensates and adds genuine meaning.

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 states a specific verb ('discover') and resource ('ASINs') within candidate markets, clearly distinguishing it from siblings like asin_score or market_screen. The 'USE THIS TOOL WHEN' line reinforces its role in finding specific ASINs in validated markets.

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 provides an explicit 'when to use' statement: 'Finding specific ASINs in validated markets.' It also implies a prerequisite (market_screen) but does not mention when not to use it or name alternative tools. This is clear context without exclusions.

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