vtex_list_gift_cards

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'List all gift cards' implies a read-only operation but doesn't specify authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior (despite pagination parameters in schema), error conditions, or what 'all' means in practice (e.g., all in a store, all active, etc.). The description is too minimal for a tool that likely interacts with sensitive financial data.

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 extremely concise at just three words, which is efficient. However, it's arguably too minimal - a single additional sentence could provide valuable context without sacrificing conciseness. The description is front-loaded with the core purpose but lacks any supporting information that would help an agent use it effectively.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what information is returned about gift cards, how results are structured, whether there are filtering options beyond pagination, or any behavioral characteristics. Given that this likely returns financial instrument data, more context about security, permissions, and result format would be valuable.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage with clear parameter documentation, so the baseline is 3. The description doesn't add any parameter information beyond what's in the schema - it doesn't explain pagination behavior, default values, or constraints. However, since the schema fully documents both parameters, this meets minimum requirements.

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 'List all gift cards' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('gift cards'), making the purpose understandable. However, it lacks specificity about scope or filtering capabilities, and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'vtex_get_gift_card' or 'vtex_get_gift_card_by_code' which retrieve specific gift cards rather than listing them all.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple sibling tools related to gift cards (vtex_get_gift_card, vtex_get_gift_card_by_code, vtex_create_gift_card, vtex_create_gift_card_transaction), but the description doesn't explain when this list operation is appropriate versus retrieving specific gift cards or performing other gift card operations.

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