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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: results reflect Kooga's last sync, `next` enables pagination, and `id` versus `storeId` have distinct downstream uses.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core resource and search behavior, then gives ID usage and usage constraints. It is dense but every clause provides operational value, and there is no filler.

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 present, the description need not explain return shape. It covers the workspace prerequisite, sync freshness, pagination, ID meanings, and the relevant sibling alternative, which is sufficient for an 8-parameter read tool.

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 88%, so most parameter meaning is already structured. The description still adds useful cross-tool semantics for `id`, `storeId`, `discountPct`, and `next`, though it does not add much to the already-described sort/filter 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 names the resource (products in the store), the core operation (search/filter/sort), and explicitly distinguishes it from readTopProducts for best sellers. It also ties product IDs to updateListing, draftCampaign, and readTopProducts, so an agent can route correctly among siblings.

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?

It gives an explicit prerequisite: only for a workspace with a store connected, with listWorkspaces as the way to check. It also names the alternative readTopProducts for best-seller data, leaving little ambiguity about when to use this tool.

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