list_products

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

Given no annotations, the description takes on the responsibility of exposing behavior. It discloses that it returns summary fields, lists filters, and specifies the return shape. However, it does not clarify behavior with null filter defaults or pagination parameters, leaving some ambiguity.

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 concise and well-structured, with a clear first sentence, a concise filter list, and a return-spec line. No wasted words.

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 list tool with 6 parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description covers the core behavior well: purpose, filters, return shape, and pointer to the full-record alternative. It lacks explicit mention of pagination semantics, but the schema covers it.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description compensates by explaining each filter: 'search: free-text search (title, code, ...)', 'active: True = active items, False = archived', etc. It does not explicitly explain page/page_size, but these are self-explanatory from names. The return shape is mentioned.

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 'List products and services with summary fields.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool 'get_product' by noting 'use get_product for the full record.'

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus an alternative: 'use get_product for the full record.' It also explains each filter's purpose, giving clear context for how to use the tool.

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