list_product_statuses

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read-only GET operation but does not mention authentication requirements, pagination, or what the returned list contains. Beyond the HTTP method, no meaningful behavioral context is given.

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 a single concise sentence that immediately states the purpose and includes the endpoint. It is front-loaded and efficient, with no wasted words, though it lacks any additional structured detail.

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?

With no annotations or output schema, the description is the sole source of context. It provides only a minimal restatement of the tool name plus an endpoint, failing to explain what a product status is, what the response looks like, or when this list is useful. It is inadequate for a tool within a large sibling set.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema is vacuously complete. According to the rubric, a baseline of 4 applies for 0-parameter tools. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed.

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 retrieves a list of product statuses, with a specific verb and resource. It includes the endpoint, which adds precision. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from related sibling tools like list_event_product_statuses, so it does not fully meet the 'distinguishes from siblings' criterion for a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or recommended context. The description simply states the action without explaining scenarios or prerequisites, providing no usage direction.

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