store_list_shipping_rates

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description doesn't need to repeat these. However, it fails to add behavioral context such as the pagination behavior (limit/offset), the fact that it returns a list scoped to a shipping zone, or the default altId behavior. The description adds no 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 extremely terse—just three words—but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. There is no structure, no front-loading of key information, and no attempt to convey tool behavior or requirements.

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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters (1 required), pagination controls, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It doesn't mention the required shippingZoneId, the optional limit/offset, or what the returned data represents. An agent would have to open the schema and infer everything—this description provides negligible assistance.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all five parameters, so the description is not responsible for documenting them. However, it also doesn't add any contextual meaning—it doesn't hint at the relationship between shippingZoneId and the list, or that altId defaults to location. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema already handles parameter semantics.

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 'List Shipping Rates' states a verb and resource, but it's essentially a rephrasing of the tool name and adds no scope or differentiation. It doesn't clarify how it differs from the sibling 'store_get_shipping_rates', and provides no information about what 'shipping rates' refers to in this context.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like store_get_shipping_rates, store_list_shipping_zones, or store_create_shipping_rate. The description doesn't mention the required shippingZoneId parameter, read-only nature, or any conditions for selection.

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