list_my_products

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

With readOnlyHint/openWorldHint already covering the safety profile, the description adds real domain behavior: a channel can remove or deactivate a listing at any time, sync_status can be historically stale, and health reflects the channel's last word. This is exactly the kind of context an agent cannot infer from the schema or 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?

Purpose is front-loaded, followed by the important stale-sync caveat and scope guidance. Efficient prose, though the trailing '[#06afd6]' artifact is stray noise that should not be in a tool description.

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?

With no output schema, the description does the work of explaining the key return fields (sync_status and health), which is the main thing an agent needs. It remains thin on several input parameters, but as a read-only list tool it is close to sufficient.

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 only 17% (store_uuid is the lone documented param), so the description carries the burden—but it only restates store_uuid and never explains limit, search, status, workspace, or sync_state. The health/sync_status discussion loosely supports interpreting sync_state but does not define the enum values.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the merchant's products') plus the payload it returns (fulfillment and sales-channel sync status). An agent can tell it apart from create_product/archive_product. It does not, however, explicitly contrast itself with nearby listing siblings like browse_catalog or channel_coverage.

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?

Provides parameter-scoped guidance ('Pass store_uuid to scope to one store; omit for all products') and hints at result interpretation via the health check. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not or named alternative tool, so usage is only implied.

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