List Products

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the pagination behavior and the brief-by-default response shape, which is genuinely useful, but says nothing about page-size limits, total counts, or ordering. With annotations carrying the safety burden, a mid score fits.

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?

Three short fragments, zero filler, with the default behavior and the escalation path front-loaded after the core purpose. Every clause earns its place.

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 simple zero-required-parameter list tool with full schema coverage and read-only annotations, this is nearly complete. The only gap is that it doesn't hint at result volume or whether pagination terminates, but that is minor given no output schema exists.

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%, and the schema itself explains page defaults, the brief/full enum, and the ISO 8601 modified_since format. The description repeats the view='full' semantics rather than adding syntax or format detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List products/services') and explicitly routes detail-seeking callers to the sibling get_product. It does not differentiate from other list_x siblings like list_sale_articles or list_purchase_articles, so it falls just short of the top band.

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?

Gives clear context for the view choice: brief by default, and switch to view='full' or get_product when detail is needed. However it offers no exclusions or guidance on when to prefer a different product-listing sibling, so it is clear context without explicit alternatives coverage.

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