List connected Shopify stores

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by disclosing that the result includes connection state, scopes, token expiry and tool versions, which explains why it is useful diagnostically. It does not discuss pagination or any constraints on very large store lists.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with what is listed and ending with the operational rule for when to call it. The dense field list is justified because the tool has no output schema and the fields are the key information.

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?

With no input parameters, no output schema, and only general annotations, the description must carry most of the informational load. It does so by enumerating returned fields and explaining the diagnostic use case, so an agent can decide to call it and interpret the result.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema carries no semantic burden. The description usefully clarifies that the returned store name is the value to pass as "store" in other tools, which is relevant context even though it is not a parameter of this tool.

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 states a specific verb and resource: list every store this server can work on. It then enumerates the exact fields exposed, which lets an agent distinguish this from store-specific siblings such as get_shop and from connection tools such as connect_store.

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?

It gives an explicit invocation rule: call this first when unsure which stores exist or why a call failed. That is strong positive guidance, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use this tool, e.g. when the store name is already known.

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