list_import_list

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

Description discloses pagination behavior, that ships_to is not in list items (redirecting to get_product), and the authentication requirement (HERTWILL_API_KEY). Annotations are absent, so description carries the burden; it adds useful behavioral context beyond the schema, though it does not explicitly state idempotency.

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?

Description is concise (3 sentences), front-loaded with purpose, and each sentence adds value. No wasted words.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 optional params, no output schema), the description covers the return format (paginated envelope), a data limitation (ships_to absent), and auth requirement. It is largely complete, though it could mention that the result is filtered by store authentication.

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?

Input schema has 100% parameter description coverage with clear definitions (e.g., page, per_page, status, order_by, order). The description does not add extra semantics to the parameters beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns the authenticated store's current Hertwill import list, paginated. It provides a specific verb ('return') and resource ('import list'), and distinguishes from siblings by stating what it is used for ('audit what's staged for sync') and what it is not for.

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?

Explicitly lists when NOT to use the tool (search_products, add_to_import_list, get_sync_jobs) and names the alternative tools. This provides clear guidance for selecting the correct tool.

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