printful_get_product_variants

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds useful context about what data is returned (variant IDs, names, sizes, colors, preview images) and that variant IDs are needed for ordering, which isn't covered by annotations.

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 concise sentences with zero waste: first states purpose, second explains variant ID importance, third lists returned data. Each sentence adds distinct value, and the description is appropriately front-loaded with the core function.

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?

With annotations covering safety/idempotency, an output schema presumably detailing the return structure, and a clear purpose, the description is mostly complete. However, it lacks guidance on when to use versus sibling tools, which is a minor gap given the tool's straightforward read-only nature.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description doesn't mention any parameters. The schema fully documents product_id, limit, offset, and format with descriptions and constraints. Since schema coverage is low, the description doesn't compensate, but the schema provides complete parameter documentation, establishing a baseline of 3.

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 clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('all variants for a product'), specifying it retrieves size/color combinations. It distinguishes from siblings like printful_get_product (which gets product details) and printful_get_variant_prices (which focuses on pricing).

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 implies usage when variant IDs are needed for ordering, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like printful_get_product or printful_get_sync_product. No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions is provided.

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