microsoftstore_publisher

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool is credential-free, reads public store data directly from the store's own browse-by-publisher API, and is cursor-paginated. It does not cover edge cases like unknown publisher behavior or rate limits, but the core safety and pagination traits are transparent.

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, each earning its place: scope, pagination, parameter constraint + auth/source. Front-loaded with the core action and no filler.

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 catalog-list tool with no output schema, it is fairly complete: it states output scope (every product), pagination behavior, parameter constraint, and data source. It stops short of describing the item fields returned or error behavior, but those are not critical for selecting/calling the tool.

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 already documents all four parameters (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning to publisher_name by requiring exact match and giving concrete examples of where to obtain it (publisher field from product/search endpoints), which is above baseline.

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 ('List') and resource ('publisher's full catalog'), and specifies it returns every product a publisher has listed, cursor-paginated. The scope is distinct from sibling microsoftstore_* tools like search, categories, and product because it is explicitly keyed on publisher/developer.

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?

Gives clear context on when to use: when you need a publisher's full catalog, and explicitly requires publisher_name to match exactly as shown on a listing. It points to /microsoftstore/product or /microsoftstore/search as sources for that name, though it does not explicitly state exclusions or compare with alternative microsoftstore_* tools for similar lookups.

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