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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is already covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond that: pagination semantics ("page and limit paginate") and the non-obvious edge case that an empty page still returns 200 rather than an error.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the resource and source, followed by the routing guidance. Every clause earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and annotations cover the safety profile. Combined with the pagination note, empty-page edge case, and sibling routing, the definition is complete for a paginated catalog-listing 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 description coverage is 100%, so page (1-based, default 1) and limit (max 250) are fully documented in the schema. The description only restates that they paginate without adding format or bounds detail, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ("List") and resource ("normalized product-collection records") with the fixed source scoped. It explicitly distinguishes itself from colehaan_collection_products and colehaan_products, so an agent can separate this catalog-level listing from item-level lookups.

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?

Names both alternatives and the condition that selects each: colehaan_collection_products for items within one collection, colehaan_products for the general catalog. This leaves nothing to inference about when to choose this tool.

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