List Sales Channels

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral details beyond the action itself, such as return format, pagination, permissions, or error conditions. The verb 'List' implies read-only, but this is not explicitly stated.

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, succinct sentence without any fluff. It is front-loaded with the action and clearly states the scope, making it efficiently structured.

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 is minimal and adequate for a simple list operation, but it lacks any mention of the response format, potential filters, or other caveats. With no output schema or annotations, more context would improve completeness.

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 has 100% coverage for store_id (described as 'Store ID'), and the tool description adds no additional meaning beyond that. This matches the baseline for high schema coverage; the description does not compensate with extra parameter insights.

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 action (List) and resource (sales channels) with the scope 'for a store', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like ecommerce_channels_create/update and ecommerce_stores_list. The verb is specific and unambiguous.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, nor any exclusions. The phrase 'for a store' implies the need for a store_id, which is also evident from the schema, but no context about use cases or alternative tools is provided.

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