list_attribute_terms

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint:true, so the read-only nature is already known. The description adds an illustrative example and recommends using the fields param, but doesn't disclose behaviors like pagination, sorting, or response shape.

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 clear sentences with front-loaded purpose and a concrete example. No wasted words.

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?

The tool is simple with complete schema coverage and read-only annotation. Description plus schema is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly; only minor missing context like pagination defaults (though present in schema).

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 descriptions cover all 4 parameters at 100%, so baseline credit applies. The description adds a hint to use fields for efficiency, which is useful but not substantial beyond the schema.

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?

Description explicitly says 'List values (terms) for a product attribute' with concrete examples ('500g', '1kg' for Weight). This is a specific verb+resource that clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_attributes and get_attribute.

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 provides a clear use case (listing attribute terms) but does not explicitly compare to alternative tools or state when not to use it. The fields param tip is operational guidance rather than tool-selection guidance.

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