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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the cost model ('1 point per returned record'), but says nothing about read-only nature, pagination behavior despite a start_page param, rate limits, or auth requirements for the merchant slug.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope, then filters and sorting. Efficient and free of redundancy, though the filter parenthetical is dense.

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?

Adequate for a pure listing tool with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, but with 16 parameters and zero annotations the description omits pagination semantics, result format expectations, and any merchant-scope constraints, leaving notable 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all 16 parameters are already documented in the schema; baseline is 3. The description's summary of filter groups (brand, color, price range, rating, delivery, discount, photo reviews) adds a light thematic grouping but no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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') and resource ('products sold by a Hepsiburada merchant'), which clearly scopes it to merchant-scoped listings. However it does not name the sibling it differs from (e.g. run_hepsiburada_products_search or run_hepsiburada_categories_products), so an agent must infer the distinction from the schema alone.

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?

Usage is implied: use this when you have a merchant and want that merchant's products. There is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-not guidance and no routing to alternatives like the general product search or products_sellers tools, leaving selection to inference.

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