list_commodities

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get a list' implies a read-only operation and the description states the result scope ('all commodity types available'), but it does not explicitly mention whether the call has side effects, whether authentication is required, or how results are returned.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence communicates the resource, scope, and examples without any filler or redundant phrasing. Every word contributes to the meaning.

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 simplicity (zero parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is nearly complete: it names the resource, the scope, and the result type ('a list'). It does not specify the exact output format, but this is a minor gap for a simple enumeration 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?

The schema has zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to add. The baseline of 4 applies because the tool requires no inputs and the description adequately conveys what will be returned.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get a list') and identifies the exact resource ('commodity types available on Mine Market') with concrete examples. This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_countries and get_market_stats.

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 context is clear: this is the tool to use whenever the agent needs the set of available commodity types on Mine Market. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the sibling tools cover different resources, so the usage context is reasonably unambiguous.

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