List Products

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

There are no annotations provided, so the description carries the burden of conveying behavioral traits. 'Browse' implies a read-only operation, and the optional filters are mentioned. However, it doesn't disclose details such as pagination behavior, return format, or that results are a list of products. This is adequate but not rich.

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 a single, succinct sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with the filter options immediately following. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 low complexity of this tool, the lack of output schema, and the full parameter documentation in the schema, the description is nearly complete. It could explicitly state that the tool returns a list of products, but 'browse the product catalog' strongly implies a list result. The limits and filter details are already in the schema, so the description suffices for the agent.

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 descriptions cover 100% of the parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a high-level mention of 'category and text filters' that maps to category and query parameters, but it does not add detail beyond what the schema already provides, such as the exact match fields for query.

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 'Browse' with a clear resource ('the product catalog') and mentions optional category and text filters, which precisely conveys the tool's function. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like get_order and search_customers, which target different resources.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool ('Browse the product catalog') and indicates filtering options, making it obvious this is the tool for catalog exploration. While it doesn't explicitly exclude any scenarios or name alternatives, the siblings are unrelated, so no exclusion is necessary.

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