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

Annotations already mark this as readOnly and non-destructive, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the important behavioral requirement of authentication and clarifies the resource type (wishlist/bookmarks), providing value beyond the annotations.

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 a single, tight sentence that states the purpose and the key prerequisite without any extraneous words. Every word earns its place.

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 list tool with complete parameter schema and safety annotations, the description is nearly complete. It covers purpose and auth, though it could explicitly state that it returns the authenticated user's own wishlist, but this is strongly implied by 'user's' and 'Requires authentication'.

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?

All four parameters are fully described in the schema with clear meanings (pagination, offer/product filters), so the schema carries the semantic weight. The description adds no additional parameter context, resulting in a baseline score of 3 as per the high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the action ('List') and target ('user's wishlist/bookmarks'), which is specific and distinct from sibling tools like cf_add_wish and cf_remove_wish. It immediately conveys this is a read-only listing operation.

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 usage (when you need to view the wishlist) and includes a prerequisite ('Requires authentication'), but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like cf_add_wish or cf_remove_wish, nor does it state when not 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.