list_sync_productsRetrieve sync products from a connected store and filter them by status, such as synced, unsynced, or out_of_stock, to review and manage product sync state.
List sync products in the connected store. status can be all, synced, unsynced, ignored, imported, discontinued, or out_of_stock.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| offset | No | ||
| search | No | ||
| status | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds store scoping and the available status values, but does not disclose pagination behavior, return shape, or rate limits.
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 zero waste and front-loads the core action. The status enumeration is somewhat repetitive with the schema, but it is still compact and useful for scanning.
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 four-parameter list tool with no output schema and no schema parameter descriptions, the definition is only partially complete. It covers the status filter but leaves pagination, search semantics, and return behavior unexplained.
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 0%, so the description needs to compensate. It mentions only status, and even that merely repeats the schema enum; limit, offset, and search receive no explanation at all.
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 states a specific verb and resource: list sync products in the connected store. It is clear enough to distinguish from product-oriented siblings like get_product and search_catalog, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.
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 the tool is for listing sync products in the connected store, but it does not say when to use it instead of search_catalog or get_product. No exclusions or alternative-selection guidance are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.