everlane_products

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It adds meaningful context: products are 'normalized,' the storefront URL is fixed server-side, and valid empty result pages return 200 with an empty products array. These details go beyond the tool name and schema, though auth/rate-limit behavior is not addressed.

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 three short sentences with no redundancy. The core action is front-loaded, and each remaining sentence adds useful context: the source catalog, server-side URL constraint, and empty-page edge case. 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?

For a simple list tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description is adequately complete. It states the purpose, source, normalization behavior, and an important edge case. It doesn't enumerate return fields, but no output schema exists and the tool's simplicity makes that omission acceptable.

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 schema already documents both parameters (page and limit) with defaults and constraints. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides, which is acceptable under the baseline of 3.

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 opens with 'List Everlane products,' a specific verb+resource pairing, and clarifies it returns normalized products from Everlane's public product catalog. This is clear, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like everlane_collection_products or everlane_product, relying on the plural name and 'public product catalog' phrasing to imply the full catalog.

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 implied by 'List Everlane products' — an agent can infer this is for fetching the product catalog — but there is no explicit guidance about when to use this over sibling tools such as everlane_product or everlane_collection_products. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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