vtex_list_products

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. 'List products with pagination' implies a read-only operation but doesn't disclose critical behavioral details like authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what the output format looks like (especially important since there's no output schema). The mention of pagination is helpful but insufficient for full transparency.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and includes a useful behavioral qualifier ('with pagination'). Every word 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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool that likely returns complex product data. It doesn't explain what 'products' includes (e.g., fields, structure), how pagination works in practice (e.g., total count, next page tokens), or any prerequisites. For a list operation in a rich e-commerce context, this leaves significant gaps.

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') clearly documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying pagination exists, which the schema already covers through parameter names and descriptions. This meets the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 products with pagination' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('products'), and the 'with pagination' qualifier adds specificity about the operation's behavior. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'vtex_search_products' or 'vtex_get_product', which might offer alternative ways to retrieve product data.

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. With siblings like 'vtex_search_products' (likely for filtered searches) and 'vtex_get_product' (likely for single product retrieval), the agent has no indication of when this paginated list is preferred over those options.

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