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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description doesn't need to restate that. It adds the useful scope distinction between public/system prompts and workspace prompts, but says nothing about permissions, workspace access requirements, or result limits. Adequate but thin beyond annotations.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence followed by two tight numbered branches, zero filler. It leans slightly toward under-specification (prompt_type values, defaults) but nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and annotations cover the read-only profile. What remains needed for correct invocation — mode selection and parameter roles — is present; only enum values for prompt_type and default behavior are missing.

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%, so the description carries full burden. It does account for all five parameters by name and role: request as mode selector, prompt_id for body fetch, workspace_id and prompt_type for filtering, is_custom for workspace scoping. It stops short of giving accepted prompt_type values or default/null behavior.

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?

Opening line gives a specific verb and resource: browse the WooCommerce prompt catalog. The two numbered branches make the dual-mode nature concrete. It never names the sibling tools (execute_action, query_data, query_contexts), so an agent gets no explicit differentiation from them.

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?

Clear routing between the two modes: 'menu' lists, 'prompt_details' fetches a body by prompt_id, with the extra note that workspace prompts require is_custom=True plus workspace_id. No guidance on when NOT to use this tool or which sibling to pick instead.

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