ecommerce_listProductVariantsV1

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the read-only nature by saying 'List', the ordering (by rank), and that prices are integers in the smallest currency unit. It does not mention pagination details or error behavior, but these are secondary for a list operation; the core behavior is transparent.

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 two concise sentences, clearly stating the purpose and an important data format detail (integer prices). It is well-structured with no fluff, front-loading the core function.

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?

The description gives enough context for a list operation: what data is returned (options, prices, inventory) and ordering. It does not explain the meaning of 'rank' or pagination limits, but these are not critical for basic usage. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 schema already describes store_id and product_id clearly. The 'page' parameter is only described as 'Page number', which is minimal. The tool description adds no extra semantic detail about pagination (e.g., page size, offset). Since schema coverage is 100%, baseline is 3, and this description does not elevate it.

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 the tool's function: listing a product's variants with their options, prices, and inventory, ordered by rank. It distinguishes itself from related tools such as ecommerce_listProducts or ecommerce_createAProductVariant by focusing on reading variants for a specific product.

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?

The description implies usage: when you need to retrieve variants of a given product. It does not explicitly compare against alternatives, but the purpose is self-evident for a read-only listing operation. Slight improvement could be adding a note about when to use this versus other variant-related tools, but it is clear enough.

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