List brands
list_brandsList the brands (websites) tracked in this Howseen account, with their id, name and domain. Call this first when the account may have several brands.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
list_brandsList the brands (websites) tracked in this Howseen account, with their id, name and domain. Call this first when the account may have several brands.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new context: the payload contents (id, name, domain) and the recommended call-first sequencing, which matters since there is no output schema.
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?
Two short sentences, with the resource and returned fields front-loaded and the usage hint second. No filler or restatement of the title.
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 zero-parameter list tool, the description covers what it returns and when to call it, compensating for the absent output schema. Minor omissions (empty-account behavior, ordering) are inconsequential here.
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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. No misleading parameter claims are made.
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 ('List') plus the resource ('brands (websites) tracked in this Howseen account') and even enumerates the returned fields (id, name, domain). No sibling tool lists brands, so an agent can route unambiguously.
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?
'Call this first when the account may have several brands' gives a concrete ordering/trigger condition rather than generic boilerplate. It does not name an alternative tool to use instead, but no sibling offers overlapping functionality.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.