List revenue integrations (Shopify, Stripe, WooCommerce); secrets are never returned

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds meaningful context beyond that: secrets are never returned, so the agent knows credentials will not appear. It also pins the underlying GET endpoint, confirming a non-mutating call, but says nothing about pagination or result shape.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the resource named first and the security guarantee second. The trailing '(GET /v1/revenue/integrations)' is mildly redundant with the verb but cheap and useful for endpoint mapping.

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 zero-parameter read tool with no output schema, what an agent needs is covered: what it lists, which providers, and that secrets are excluded. Missing is any hint about result fields or whether the list is paginated, which matters more given there is no output schema to fall back on.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is no parameter semantics the description could add. The parenthetical endpoint mapping is the only supplemental detail.

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 names a specific verb+resource ('List revenue integrations') and enumerates the covered providers (Shopify, Stripe, WooCommerce). The verb alone separates it from siblings like revenue_createIntegration and revenue_importCsv, though it does not state the distinction explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: listing integrations is self-evidently the read counterpart to revenue_createIntegration, revenue_backfill and revenue_importCsv, but the description never says when to prefer this tool or what prerequisite it satisfies. No alternatives or exclusions are named.

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