list_products

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively communicates that this is a read-only operation (listing products) and specifies the data returned, but does not mention potential limitations like pagination, rate limits, or authentication needs. However, it adds valuable context about resolving product IDs, which is helpful beyond basic functionality.

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 highly concise and front-loaded, consisting of two sentences that each serve a clear purpose: the first states what the tool does, and the second provides critical usage guidance. There is no wasted language, and the structure efficiently conveys essential information.

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's simplicity (0 parameters, no annotations, but with an output schema), the description is complete. It clearly explains the tool's purpose, usage context, and output details, and the presence of an output schema means return values need not be described. This covers all necessary aspects for effective agent use.

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 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description does not add parameter-specific information, but this is appropriate given the lack of parameters. It compensates by explaining the tool's role in resolving product IDs, which is semantically relevant to its usage.

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 specific action ('List products') and resource ('in the user's account'), distinguishing it from siblings like list_campaigns or list_competitors. It provides concrete details about what information is returned (internal IDs, names, URLs, selling propositions), making the purpose explicit and differentiated.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('Call this before generate_ad_concepts to resolve product_id') and when not to ('never ask the user for IDs directly'). It names a specific alternative (generate_ad_concepts) and provides clear context for its application, offering complete guidance.

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