psastore_store

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the credential-free storefront JSON source, the fixed server-side URL, and the fallback behavior when /products.json is blocked. It could additionally state read-only behavior or describe the normalized metadata shape, but the core behavioral traits are already well covered.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The core action and resource are front-loaded, and the remaining sentences add only high-value scoping, source, and fallback details.

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 zero-parameter metadata endpoint, the description covers what is returned, where the data is sourced from, and how the service behaves under blocking. The exact fields of the normalized metadata are not described, but the description is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 has zero parameters, and the description explicitly explains why: the storefront URL is fixed server-side, so no url parameter is accepted. This adds meaning beyond the empty schema and prevents an agent from mistakenly trying to supply a url argument.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Get PSA Store store metadata'), names the exact storefront URL, and calls out that it is a brand-pinned wrapper around the generic Shopify store family. This lets an agent distinguish it from generic shopify_store and other brand-specific store tools without opening 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 clearly explains that this is the brand-pinned wrapper for the PSA Team Store and that the storefront URL is fixed server-side, so no url parameter is accepted. It gives enough context to choose this tool for PSA store metadata over generic alternatives, though it does not explicitly name an alternative tool or state when not to use it.

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