ls_list_license_key_instances

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

Annotations indicate a read-only, idempotent, and open-world tool. The description adds pagination details (meta.page fields) and cross-store constraint, which go beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 concise with two sentences. The first sentence delivers the purpose immediately; the second adds crucial behavioral context without fluff.

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 paginated list tool with no output schema, the description explains pagination fields and filter dependency. It could mention the response structure more, but given the annotations and parameters, it is sufficiently complete.

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 descriptions for all 4 parameters. The description adds value by explaining the licenseKeyId requirement in cross-store setups and mentions pagination parameters implicitly. Slightly above baseline.

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 lists license key instances (activations) with optional filtering by license key. The verb 'list' and specific resource distinguish it from sibling list tools.

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 explains pagination behavior and cross-store configuration requirements (LEMONSQUEEZY_ALLOWED_STORE_IDS), providing context for when to use. It lacks explicit alternatives but is clear enough for a straightforward list operation.

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