List brands

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'list' clearly indicates a read-only operation with no side effects. It does not mention rate limits or data modifications, but none are implied.

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 a single, concise sentence that covers the core functionality and optional parameters without unnecessary fluff. It is well-structured and easy to parse.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool, the description provides sufficient context: it states what is listed, the optional filter, and pagination support. It does not specify the output format (e.g., fields returned), but since no output schema is provided, this is not strictly required for correct usage.

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 description explicitly mentions country filtering and pagination, giving context for the 'country', 'limit', and 'offset' parameters. However, the schema only provides a description for 'country'; 'limit' and 'offset' lack individual explanations, leaving some ambiguity about their exact semantics (e.g., default values).

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 purpose: listing gift-card brands from the catalog. It also mentions optional filtering and pagination, distinguishing it from sibling tools that focus on products and orders.

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 when to use this tool (when brand lists are needed) and explains optional parameters (country filter, pagination). It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, but the domain difference is clear from the context.

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