list_store_product_variants

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds 'Authenticated via API key', 'Max 10 concurrent requests', and 'Read-only, safe to retry', which are valuable beyond 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 well-structured with a summary line, usage notes, authentication, parameter list, and return format. Every sentence adds value, and it is appropriately concise.

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 read-only listing tool with 5 parameters, the description covers purpose, usage, authentication, rate limits, parameters, pagination, and return format. It is complete and leaves minimal ambiguity.

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?

Despite schema description coverage being 0%, the description provides an Args section with brief explanations for all five parameters, adding meaning beyond the input schema properties.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'variants of a product in a store'. It is distinct from sibling tools like get_store_product_variant (single variant) or create_store_product_variant (creation).

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 explains when to use: 'to browse a product's variants and discover variant_ids' and how to paginate with offset. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context is clear. Could mention using get_store_product_variant for a single variant.

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