get-publications

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden; 'List' plus 'with their IDs' makes clear this is a non-mutating enumeration that returns name/ID pairs. For a zero-parameter lookup the risk surface is small, though pagination or whether the list is bounded is never 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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with what it returns, followed by the follow-up action. No filler.

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 trivial no-arg list tool with no output schema and no annotations, this covers the essentials: what is returned, in what form, and what to do with it. Only the relationship to get-product-publications is left unaddressed.

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 declares zero properties, so there is nothing to document; baseline applies. The description usefully clarifies that the output contains both names and IDs, which matters for downstream calls.

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 the store's sales channels (publications)') and even names example values, so an agent can tell this enumerates store-level channels rather than a product's channels. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling get-product-publications, leaving that boundary implicit.

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 a clear downstream use case: take the returned names/IDs and pass them to publish-product or unpublish-product. That is genuine routing guidance. It lacks an explicit 'do not use when...' or a named alternative like get-product-publications.

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