list_listings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotation baseline: nothing about scoping to an edit or package, result ordering, or volume of data returned. The only extra signal, 'for every language', is a scope hint but doesn't explain behavior.

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?

It is a single short phrase with no waste, but it is under-specified rather than concise: it lacks a leading verb and any operational detail, so the brevity costs clarity.

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 tool with two undocumented, mutually ambiguous scoping parameters and no output schema, the description should explain what edit_id vs package_name select and what a listing record contains per language. None of that is present, leaving the agent unable to call it correctly without experimentation.

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?

Both parameters (edit_id, package_name) have 0% schema description coverage and are nullable with no defaults explained, yet the description never mentions either one or how they scope the listing. An agent cannot tell whether edit_id or package_name is required to get a meaningful result.

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 names the resource (store listings) and its contents (title, short/full description, video, per language), which partially distinguishes it from siblings like update_listing or list_images. However, it is a noun fragment with no verb, so it never actually states that the tool retrieves/lists these listings; an agent must infer the operation from the name alone.

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?

There is no indication of when to call this versus update_listing, list_images, or get_app_details, and no mention of prerequisites such as needing an edit_id from an edit workflow. Usage can only be guessed from the tool name.

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