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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond that by disclosing the response envelope ({page, totalsCount, isLastPage, entries[]}) and the underlying endpoint, though it says nothing about rate limits or default paging behavior beyond what the schema states.

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?

Three tight sentences, each earning its place: identity, disambiguation, return shape. The most decision-relevant content (what an item is, and where variations live) is front-loaded.

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, the description usefully supplies the return envelope, and the sibling disambiguation is present. Minor gaps remain around pagination defaults and whether filtering is optional, but the schema covers most of that and the core call decision is fully supported.

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 89%, so nearly every parameter is already documented in the schema. The description only says 'with filters' generically and adds no syntax or interpretation beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List items') and immediately clarifies what an item is ('the product containers'), which the agent cannot infer from the bare name. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling list_variations by declaring that prices, stock, barcodes and SKUs are not part of this resource.

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 routes the agent: 'use plentymarkets_list_variations for those' with the exact condition (prices, stock, barcodes, SKUs). The alternative and the trigger for choosing it are both named, leaving nothing to inference.

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