List items

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the useful detail that results include variants, prices, and SKUs, but it does not disclose pagination, default limits, or soft-delete behavior beyond what the schema already exposes.

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 sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the core function, and the second sentence provides a practical use case, making it efficient and easily scannable.

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 read-only list tool with rich schema documentation and safety annotations, the description is largely sufficient. It communicates the key return content and the motivating use case, though an explicit note about pagination or default limits would make it fully complete.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are fully documented in the input schema. The description does not need to explain each parameter and adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond the general purpose of finding variant_id.

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 it lists catalogue items with variants, prices, and SKUs, and highlights the practical purpose of finding variant_id. It is specific enough about the resource and action, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling loyverse_list_variants.

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 concrete guidance: use this tool to find variant_id needed by inventory and receipt tools. This provides clear context for when to call it, but it does not mention exclusions or alternative sibling tools.

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