list_products

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description ('listing products/services') adds no additional behavioral context beyond what annotations convey. It does not contradict annotations, so baseline score is appropriate.

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?

Description is a single short sentence with no waste. It is front-loaded and efficient. Could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness.

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 straightforward nature of the tool (3 optional parameters, no output schema), the description is adequate but minimal. It does not mention pagination or search behavior, which are present in the schema. Annotations hint at large result sets (openWorldHint=true) but description does not elaborate.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning for the parameters (page, per_page, query) beyond their schema descriptions. No additional value is provided by the description.

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?

Description states 'listing products/services' which makes the verb and resource clear. However, it does not differentiate from sibling list tools like list_documents or list_partners. The name and title already indicate the tool's purpose, so clarity is adequate but not outstanding.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_partners or list_documents. The description only states what it does, not when to choose it over other list tools. There are no exclusions or context provided.

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