GetProductTypes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions filtering, sorting, and pagination but doesn't specify whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are required, rate limits, error conditions, or the format of returned data. For a list-retrieval tool with 11 parameters, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 efficiently structured in two sentences that cover the core purpose and main capabilities. It's appropriately sized without unnecessary elaboration, though it could be more front-loaded with critical usage information.

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 complexity (11 parameters, no schema descriptions, no output schema, no annotations), the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain how to use the numerous filtering parameters, what data format is returned, error handling, or how this differs from similar list-retrieval tools. For a tool with this many undocumented parameters, much more guidance is needed.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for 11 parameters, the description must compensate but only mentions filtering by 'id' and general sorting/pagination. It doesn't explain what 'fields', '$and', '$or', 'q', 'value', 'created_at', or 'updated_at' parameters do, nor their expected formats. The description adds minimal value beyond what's implied by parameter names.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('list of product types'), making it immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from its sibling 'GetProductTypesId' which presumably retrieves a single product type by ID, leaving some ambiguity about when to use one versus the other.

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 mentions filtering, sorting, and pagination capabilities but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'GetProductTypesId' for single records or other list-retrieval tools like 'GetProducts'. There's no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or comparison with sibling tools.

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