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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered structurally. The description goes beyond that by disclosing the return payload contents (prices, stock, attributes per variation), which is meaningful since no output schema exists.

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, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded and the return payload immediately after. Nothing needs trimming or reordering.

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 read-only two-parameter list tool with full schema coverage and safety annotations, the description is nearly sufficient, and the mention of returned fields compensates for the absent output schema. Pagination or result-size behavior is the only notable omission.

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 both product_id and site_id are already documented in the schema. The description adds no format, constraint, or ID-sourcing detail beyond what the schema provides, which is the expected baseline.

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?

Names a specific verb (List) and resource (variations of a variable product), which is narrower and more precise than the generic list siblings. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from woo_list_products or woo_get_product, so an agent must infer the boundary from the 'variable product' qualifier.

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?

No when-to-use, prerequisites, or alternatives are given. The description never says to call this only for products with type=variable, nor does it point to woo_get_product or woo_list_products for the non-variation cases.

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