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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, but the description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond them: an empty valid page returns HTTP 200 with an empty products array (so 200 does not imply non-empty results), and the storefront URL is fixed server-side. These details aid correct interpretation of results.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by behavioral notes, param details, and the alternative-tool pointer. Slightly padded by the param restatements that duplicate the schema, but overall tight and well-ordered.

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, return-value detail is unnecessary, and annotations cover the read-only/open-world profile. The description supplies pagination behavior, empty-page semantics, and sibling routing, leaving little an agent needs that is missing for a paged 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 both parameters (page, limit) are already fully documented in the schema. The description merely restates 'limit: maximum products... default 50, maximum 250' and 'page: 1-based... default 1' verbatim, adding no new semantic meaning; 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 and resource: returns normalized products from Oh Polly's public product catalog. It identifies the sibling by name (ohpolly_product) for single-product lookup, letting an agent distinguish the listing tool from the detail tool, though the list/browse nature is only implied through the pagination params.

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 points to the alternative: 'Use ohpolly_product to get a Oh Polly product,' which implies this tool is for catalog browsing rather than single-item retrieval. No explicit when-not condition or prerequisites, but the routing to the sibling is clear enough for correct selection.

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