listProductsList every product a store publishes, from the store's own catalogue.
Works for Shopify and WooCommerce stores without a key: one request per
page of up to 250 products, with title, price, availability, variants and
the product URL. Use this instead of crawling a shop.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | ||
| limit | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds beyond that: no key required, pagination up to 250 products per request, and the fields returned (title, price, availability, variants, URL). This is meaningful extra context, though it omits details like rate limits or error behavior.
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 sentences, purpose first, then key details. Every clause adds value and there is no fluff.
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?
With an output schema and annotations covering safety, the description covers the essential usage context: no key, pagination, returned fields, and when to use it. It is not exhaustive (e.g., no mention of errors or rate limits), but for a read-only list operation it is adequate.
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 must explain the parameters. It does not explicitly define 'url' or 'limit'. It implies 'url' is the store URL and mentions 'up to 250 products' but does not connect that to the 'limit' parameter. This is insufficient given zero schema coverage.
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 ('list'), resource ('every product a store publishes'), and scope ('from the store's own catalogue'). It also explicitly contrasts with crawling a shop, differentiating it from sibling tools like 'crawl' or 'scrape'.
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?
Explicitly states 'Use this instead of crawling a shop', providing a direct alternative and when to prefer it. Also notes it works for Shopify and WooCommerce without a key, which is a clear condition for use.
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.