list_my_stores

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description's 'Read-only' merely restates that. It does add useful context about what each returned store contains (providers and channels), which partly compensates for the absence of an output schema, but omits pagination, ordering, and workspace-scoping behavior.

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 tight sentences with the primary purpose front-loaded and no filler. The trailing '[#739377]' tracking token is inert noise that slightly detracts from an otherwise clean, well-structured definition.

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?

For a read-only listing tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description supplies the essential missing piece: what each listed store includes. Pagination and result-size behavior remain unspecified, but nothing critical to invoking it correctly is absent.

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% for the single 'workspace' parameter, and that description already explains the agency-scoping and default-workspace behavior. The description adds nothing about the parameter, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 stores) and enriches it with scope: each store's fulfillment providers and connected sales channels. This is clearly distinguishable from siblings like list_my_workspaces or list_my_products. It stops short of naming an alternative tool for the same job, but none of the siblings obviously competes.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no alternatives named. The agent can infer that this is the store-enumeration call, but the description does nothing to route it relative to create_store, archive_store, or move_store_to_workspace.

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