vtex_list_prices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions pagination (a behavioral trait), but doesn't disclose other critical behaviors: whether this is a read-only operation, what authentication is required, rate limits, error handling, or what the output format looks like (since no output schema exists). The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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?

Extremely concise single sentence with zero waste. Front-loaded with the core action ('List all prices') followed by the key behavioral detail ('with pagination'). Every word earns its place, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a list tool. It doesn't explain what 'prices' means in this context (e.g., product prices, promotion prices), what fields are returned, how pagination works in practice, or error conditions. For a tool with 2 parameters and no structured output documentation, more context is needed to be fully usable.

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%, with both parameters ('page' and 'pageSize') well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying pagination exists. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting, but the description doesn't compensate with any extra context about parameter usage or constraints.

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 prices with pagination' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('prices'), but it's vague about scope and doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'vtex_get_price' (singular) or 'vtex_get_computed_price'. It specifies 'all prices' but doesn't clarify if this includes archived, inactive, or filtered prices.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'vtex_get_price' (for a single price) or 'vtex_get_computed_price' (for calculated prices). The description implies it's for listing all prices, but doesn't mention prerequisites, filtering capabilities, or when pagination is necessary versus other list tools.

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