kyliecosmetics_products

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that products are normalized, the URL is fixed server-side, and valid empty pages return 200 with an empty products array. This helps the agent interpret responses correctly. It does not cover rate limits or full response shape, but the core behavioral traits are disclosed.

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 concise sentences, each adding distinct value: the action, the data source and normalization, and an important edge-case behavior. No filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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, optional-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description is reasonably complete: it names the source, clarifies normalization, and documents empty-page behavior. It could mention the general shape or fields of returned products, but this is not essential for correct invocation.

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?

The input schema already documents page and limit with defaults and maximums, so schema coverage is effectively complete. The description adds no extra meaning about pagination parameters, which is acceptable given the schema already carries that information.

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 identifies the verb ('List') and resource ('Kylie Cosmetics products'), and specifies that it returns normalized products from the public product catalog. It is distinct from singular product or collection-scoped siblings by naming the full catalog, though it does not explicitly contrast against kyliecosmetics_collection_products.

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 implies this is the tool for retrieving the broad Kylie Cosmetics product catalog, and the fixed server-side URL tells the agent not to supply a storefront URL. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives such as kyliecosmetics_product or kyliecosmetics_collection_products.

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