Get custom storefront setup instructions

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and non-destructive, so no contradiction exists. The description adds the Markdown output format and scope of the instructions, but it does not elaborate on response contents, authentication, or side effects. That is acceptable given the annotation coverage, though it provides only modest additional behavioral detail.

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?

One well-formed sentence carries the action, target, output format, and purpose without repetition. It is front-loaded with 'Retrieve step-by-step setup instructions' and wastes no tokens.

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 zero-parameter read-only tool, the description gives enough context: what to retrieve, for which purpose, and in what format. There is no output schema, but the tool is simple enough that the missing response details are unlikely to prevent correct invocation.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and an empty schema, so there is no parameter ambiguity for the description to resolve. With no parameters, a 4 baseline is appropriate; nothing is missing.

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 specific verb ('Retrieve'), a specific resource ('custom storefront setup instructions'), and notes the output format (Markdown). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling sales-channel CRUD tools like ecommerce_createASalesChannelV1 or ecommerce_listSalesChannelsV1, which perform actual channel operations rather than returning guidance.

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 conveys the intended scenario: use when connecting a custom sales channel and keeping catalog/orders/shipping/payments in sync via the Ecommerce API. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the use case is clear enough that an agent can select it over the related sales-channel tools.

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