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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavior by clarifying that results are scoped to the current user and that latitude/longitude affect distance sorting. It does not describe pagination, return format, or authentication requirements.

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, with the primary purpose front-loaded and the optional sorting hint immediately after. Every sentence contributes directly to correct invocation.

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, read-only list tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key scope and sorting behavior. It could mention pagination or the expected result shape, but those omissions are minor given the tool's simplicity and the annotations already covering safety.

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 coverage is 100%, and both optional parameters are documented in the schema as being for distance sorting. The description reinforces that they improve distance sorting but adds no format, range, or coordinate-system details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when the schema already fully documents the parameters.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List stores available to the current user.' This clearly identifies the operation and scope. It does not explicitly differentiate the tool from the sibling store_get, which retrieves a single store, so it falls short of the highest clarity tier.

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 implies when to use the tool by saying it lists stores available to the current user, and it notes that optional longitude and latitude improve distance sorting. It does not explicitly say when to use this instead of store_get or menu_list, nor does it state any exclusions or prerequisites.

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