List Retailers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavior beyond annotations: 'paginated' behavior, 1-based page index, page size limits, and the returned fields ('identifier and name'). It also notes the response format options, giving context on output shape without contradicting annotations.

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 compact: one main sentence, a concise Args list, and a one-line return type. No filler or redundant text; every element adds value. It is front-loaded with purpose.

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, read-only list endpoint with no required parameters and a fully documented schema, the description plus the annotations cover all essential aspects: what is retrieved, pagination, output formats, and return shape. No output schema exists, but the description's return statement suffices.

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 100%; all three parameters (page, page_size, response_format) are fully described with defaults, ranges, and enums. The description's Args section largely paraphrases the schema ('records per page, 1-200 (default 20)') without adding new semantic meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 opens with 'List retailers / sales channels configured in the account, paginated,' using a specific verb ('list') and clearly scoping the resource ('retailers / sales channels'). This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like logiwa_list_customers or logiwa_list_products, and the return statement confirms its purpose.

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 the tool is for retrieving account-configured retailer/sales channel data, and the pagination/formatting details clarify usage. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so an agent must infer from sibling names; it lacks exclusion guidance.

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