hermes_stores

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it delivers. The standout is the locale insight: 'Hermès publishes the same worldwide directory for every market, so locale selects the language names are returned in rather than which stores are listed.' This is a genuinely non-obvious behavioral trait that prevents an agent from mistakenly using locale as a store filter. The field enumeration further clarifies what the response contains.

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?

Three sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded in the first clause, followed by a compact field list, then filtering options, then the locale nuance. The longest sentence earns its length by explaining a non-obvious behavior that would otherwise cause misuse.

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 tool with 3 optional parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is thorough: it enumerates all return fields (compensating for the missing output schema) and explains all three parameters' behavior. Minor gaps remain—no mention of pagination, result limits, or the default behavior when no filters are supplied—but these are not critical for a store directory lookup.

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 adds value beyond the schema by explaining the interaction between parameters: country and city narrow the result set, while locale only changes the language of returned names. This relational semantics is not present in the individual parameter descriptions and helps an agent combine parameters correctly.

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 a specific verb+resource pair ('List Hermès stores') and enumerates the exact return fields (name, address, city, postal code, country, coordinates, phone, hours, appointments, photos). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like hermes_product, hermes_search, and hermes_categories without needing to open any of their schemas.

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 gives clear usage context: use this to retrieve the worldwide store directory, optionally narrowed by country (name or ISO-2) or city. It also explains the locale parameter's non-filtering role. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when-not-to-use it, leaving sibling differentiation to inference from tool names.

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