list_stores

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits itself. It mentions the reason parameter is 'required for audit', which implies logging side effects, but it doesn't describe authentication needs, rate limits, or whether the operation is strictly read-only. 'List' implies a safe read, but more detail would improve transparency.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. The 'Args' line adds necessary parameter info without any fluff. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple (one parameter, no nested objects) and has an output schema, so the description doesn't need to detail return values. It provides the required parameter's purpose, the tool's scope, and the key fields. This is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It fully explains the only parameter: 'reason: Why you are listing stores (required for audit).' This adds meaning beyond the schema, clarifying both purpose and requiredness.

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 starts with a clear verb and resource: 'List all StoreLink stores' and enumerates the fields returned (id, name, city, country code, active flag). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_store, which targets a single store, and the replenishment 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 implies this is for listing all stores, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives or mention any exclusions. The 'all' qualifier suggests bulk retrieval, but there is no direct guidance on when to use this vs. get_store or the replenishment tools.

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