Retrieve a Pipedrive product's variations by product_id, including IDs, names, and prices. Use limit and cursor to paginate results.
List a product's variations (id, name, prices).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Number of items per page (default 25, max 100) | |
| cursor | No | Opaque token from previous response to fetch the next page | |
| product_id | Yes | The product ID whose variations to list |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation and it names the returned fields, but it omits permissions requirements, whether results are scoped to the authenticated company, and any pagination behavior beyond what the schema already encodes.
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?
A single tight sentence with the resource and payload front-loaded and zero filler. It is minimal but not padded.
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 paginated list tool with no output schema, naming the returned fields (id, name, prices) is genuinely useful. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the description could still say more about scoping and pagination expectations.
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%, so limit, cursor, and product_id are already fully documented (including default/max for limit). The description adds no parameter 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?
States a specific verb (List) and resource (a product's variations), plus the fields returned (id, name, prices). It is distinguishable from sibling mutations pipedrive_product_variations_create/update/delete, though it does not explicitly contrast with them or with pipedrive_deal_products_list.
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?
No when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives are given. The agent must infer that this is the read counterpart to the variations create/update/delete siblings; nothing in the text directs that choice.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.