list_brands

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read operation. The description adds behavioral context beyond the annotation by noting the WooCommerce 9.6+ version requirement and the ability to request only needed fields via the fields parameter, which is useful for performance and response shaping. No contradictions with 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 two short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose ('List product brands'), then adds key operational details (version, filtering, field selection) efficiently. Every sentence earns its place.

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 low complexity, 100% schema coverage, clear read-only annotations, and no output schema, the description is sufficient. It covers the essential context: what it does, version constraint, filtering options, and field optimization. No critical gaps remain for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 the baseline is 3. The description mentions parent, hide_empty, and fields, but the schema already explains these parameters fully. The only added semantic value is the recommendation to use the fields param to request only needed fields, which is a mild usage tip but does not substantially go 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb and resource: 'List product brands'. It distinguishes itself from sibling list tools (e.g., list_categories, list_tags) by naming 'brands' as the target and adding the WooCommerce 9.6+ context, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 clear use context: to list product brands, with mentions of filtering by parent and hide_empty, and advice to use fields for selective retrieval. It does not explicitly name alternatives like get_brand for single-brand retrieval, but the listing context is evident and no exclusions are given.

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