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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable context about the returned data (Stripe-verified prices, billing terms, delivery, live availability), going beyond the structured annotations without contradicting them.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Everything an agent can buy') followed by the key value propositions. There is zero redundancy or filler; every word earns its place.

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 simple, parameterless list tool with annotations covering safety, the description is complete. It explicitly states what is returned (products with prices, billing, delivery, availability) and implies it's a full catalog. No output schema exists, so the description fully covers the informational needs of the agent.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema is empty. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description doesn't need to explain any parameters. It correctly focuses on the output content, which is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

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 the verb (list) and resource (products purchasable from Black Label Real Estate), and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_checkout or estate_search by focusing specifically on the catalog of purchasable items with pricing and availability details.

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?

The description provides clear context: this tool returns everything an agent can buy, which implicitly tells the agent when to use it (e.g., before purchasing). It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but since no other sibling tool lists products, the usage is unambiguous and well-contextualized.

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