Retrieve a paginated list of products and inventory items from SyncroMSP. Specify a page number to navigate results.
List products/inventory items
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "products_list"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only says 'List products/inventory items.' It does not disclose behavioral traits like pagination, sorting, filtering, or rate limits, which are relevant for a list tool.
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 a single sentence that earns its place. However, it could be more structured by adding key details upfront, such as pagination behavior.
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 annotations, output schema, and minimal input schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain pagination defaults, response format, or how to handle large lists, which are essential for effective use.
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% (one parameter 'page' described as 'Page number'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so 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 'List products/inventory items' clearly states the tool's function using a specific verb ('List') and resource ('products/inventory items'). It is distinguishable from sibling tools like products_get or admin_list_items, though it could be more precise about scope.
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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives such as products_get (for a single product) or admin_list_items (for inventory), nor does it specify prerequisites or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.