ls_list_stores

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral details beyond annotations: it reveals the pagination mechanism and the response structure (meta.page with currentPage, lastPage, total). No contradictions exist.

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 consists of two concise sentences: the first states the core purpose, and the second explains pagination. Every word earns its place. It is front-loaded with the most important information and contains no 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?

Given the lack of an output schema, the description explains the pagination fields in the response, which is essential. It covers the authenticated user scope and pagination. While it does not mention optional filtering or sorting, those are not necessary for a basic list tool. With strong annotations, the description 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 clear descriptions for all three parameters (include, pageNumber, pageSize). The description does not add significant new meaning beyond what the schema already provides, except that it reiterates pagination context. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'List all stores for the authenticated user', using a specific verb and resource. It also mentions pagination, which is a key aspect. The tool name 'ls_list_stores' and title 'List stores' reinforce its purpose, and among sibling list tools, it uniquely targets stores, so differentiation is clear.

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 explicit guidance on pagination: 'Results are paginated — check meta.page...' It tells the agent how to navigate pages. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., ls_get_store), but since the siblings include single-resource tools, the context is clear enough for a list-all operation.

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