gumroad_list_operations

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It conveys the non-mutating nature ('Browse') and the scope (105 operations, returns operation ids), which covers the core behavioral profile. However, it does not disclose return structure, pagination behavior for a 105-item listing, or how the search filter affects results.

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?

Two sentences with zero filler. Scope is front-loaded, the tool's purpose is stated immediately, and the sibling-tool routing is delivered in the final clause. Every sentence earns its place.

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 low-complexity discovery tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers what it does, why to use it, and how it relates to dedicated siblings. The main gap is the lack of detail on what the returned list looks like when search is empty versus filtered, which is minor for an index 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 coverage is 100%, with the search parameter already documented ('Filter by id, path, tag or summary'). The description's category list (sales, variant, license) partially reinforces the search hints, but it adds no genuinely new parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Browse'), resource ('all 105 operations in the Gumroad v2 API'), and scope, enumerating the covered categories (products, sales, payouts, webhooks, etc.). It differentiates itself from the operation-executing siblings by framing itself as an index/discovery tool that feeds gumroad_call.

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 explicit use context: 'Use this to find an operation id for gumroad_call.' It also signals the routing rule that common operations have dedicated tools below, implying the agent should prefer those for frequent cases. It stops short of explicitly naming each alternative or stating a hard when-not-to-use rule, but the guidance is clear enough.

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