home_products

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet it says nothing about whether the call is read-only, requires authentication, is user-specific, or how results are ordered. The only behavior conveyed is that the content corresponds to a home-screen slider, which is a restatement of the name rather than added context.

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 single sentence is tight and wastes no words, but the brevity comes from omission rather than precision. There is no front-loaded verb or scope statement to anchor the agent before it reads the schema.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but for a tool with no annotations and an undocumented parameter the description should still cover access/auth expectations and how it differs from the many product-listing siblings. It supplies none of that, leaving the definition materially incomplete.

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 is one parameter, limit, with a default of 12 and 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it. The agent cannot tell from either source whether limit caps the number of slider items returned or has some other effect, so the description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 a resource — the product slider on the app's home screen — which implies it returns the products featured in that slider. However, it is a noun phrase rather than a verb+resource statement, and it does not distinguish this from nearby siblings like home_layout, product_cards, my_products, or new_products, which plausibly return overlapping content.

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 guidance on when to call this versus home_layout, product_cards, new_products, or my_products — all of which could surface home-screen or featured products. No prerequisites, no exclusions, no mention of whether this is personalized or guest-accessible, so an agent must guess from the name alone.

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