List products

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered by structured data; 'Changes nothing' largely restates that. The description adds the 1–100 limit cap, which is mild extra context, but says nothing about pagination behavior, result ordering, or whether more results exist beyond the limit.

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 tightly written sentences with no filler, and the highest-value information (what is returned) plus the safety signal are front-loaded. Nothing is repeated or padded.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description correctly takes on the job of describing the return payload (ids, prices, currencies, buyer links), and annotations carry the safety profile. The only gap is pagination advice — with a bare 'limit' and no cursor/offset parameter, the agent isn't told whether results are truncated or how to fetch beyond the limit.

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 (limit, business) are already documented in the schema, making the 3 baseline correct. The description echoes the limit range but adds no meaning beyond it, and never mentions the 'business' parameter that lets the caller act on behalf of a managed business.

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 gives a specific verb+resource ('List products and plans') and even enumerates the returned fields (ids, prices, currencies, buyer links), so the agent knows exactly what this returns. It does not, however, differentiate itself from adjacent list tools such as agenta_subscriptions_list or agenta_products_create, leaving the sibling boundary implicit.

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?

Usage is only implied: 'Changes nothing' signals this is the safe read-only option when you just need to enumerate products/plans, and the limit range (1 to 100) constrains how it's called. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement nor a named alternative (e.g. subscriptions_list vs products_list) to route the agent.

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