Get Shopify Products

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: cursor pagination support, a default limit of 10, and the payload-weight tradeoff between full and summary ("much lighter"). It does not describe rate limits or return envelope shape, keeping it out of 5 territory.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence plus pagination note, then a tight args list — every line is short and scannable. The args list partially duplicates the schema, which is the only mild waste, but nothing is bloated or buried.

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 7-parameter, zero-required list tool with no output schema, the description covers the decisions that matter: how to filter (searchTitle vs raw query), how to page, and which detail level to request. It leaves the relationship between searchTitle and query, and the return shape, implicit, which is a minor gap.

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 86%, so the baseline is 3, and the description does add value on top: it spells out what "full" includes (variants, inventory, pricing, SKUs, images) and why summary exists. The remaining args (searchTitle, query, limit, after/before) largely restate the schema, so it is a modest improvement rather than a transformation.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource ("List or search products") that an agent can act on immediately. It implicitly separates itself from shopify_get_product_by_id (single-product fetch) and write tools like shopify_create_product, but never names a sibling or states the boundary explicitly, so it stops short of 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?

The detail parameter carries genuine usage guidance: "use this for bulk scans, filtering, or deciding what to tag" tells the agent when to pick summary over full. There is no explicit when-not or alternative-tool routing (e.g. vs shopify_search), so it is clear context rather than full routing guidance.

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