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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the bar is low. The description still adds genuine value by disclosing the shape of the response — per-brand product count and lowest case price — which the annotations cannot convey.

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?

A single sentence with no filler that front-loads the resource and then the returned fields. Nothing is repeated from the title and nothing could be cut without losing information.

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 no output schema and no parameters, the description carries the burden of describing what comes back, and it does so adequately. Minor gap: it does not say whether the brand list is paginated, filtered by availability, or returned in full, which matters for a catalog-listing call.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain and the schema coverage baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly spends no words on inputs.

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 resource (wholesale Korean skincare brands) and states what each entry carries (product counts, lowest case price). It is clearly distinct from product-level siblings like get_wholesale_product and search_wholesale_products, though it never explicitly says so.

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 only implied: as a zero-parameter catalog listing it is evidently the browse-first entry point before get_wholesale_product or quote_wholesale_order. No sentence states when to prefer it over search_wholesale_products or what precondition (account/wholesale access) applies.

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