browse_products

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It states the output fields and the 'all available products' scope, but it does not explicitly clarify read-only behavior, pagination, or the tension between 'all' and the schema's limit max 20. This is adequate but has clear gaps.

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 only two sentences and front-loads the core purpose. Every sentence contributes value: the first states what it does, the second describes the return and usage intent.

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 simple browse tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the return payload (names, prices, categories, availability) and the discovery use case. It does not mention defaults for optional parameters like sort or limit, but the schema covers those, making the description largely 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?

The schema covers 100% of parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions 'categories' as an output field, which loosely aligns with the category filter, but it adds no meaningful parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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's function: 'Browse all available products at The Bag Kenya' and mentions the return of a list with specific fields. It distinguishes itself from siblings like browse_bundles and browse_categories by focusing on products across categories.

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?

It provides explicit usage context with 'Use this to discover what's available,' which tells the agent when to invoke it for exploration. It does not mention exclusions or alternatives like search_products, so it falls short of a 5.

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