feegow_list_products

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It explicitly states the tool is a CONSULTA (non-destructive) and explains that pagination and filters go in the body. But it lacks information about authorization requirements, rate limits, or whether the response includes pagination metadata.

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 paragraph that front-loads the purpose and key information. It is concise, but could benefit from a more structured format (e.g., bullet points for parameters or behavior).

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?

The description lists the fields returned (name, code, category, etc.), which compensates for the lack of an output schema. It also explains pagination. However, it does not describe the JSON structure of the response or whether there are pagination metadata fields.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for each parameter. The description adds value by clarifying the HTTP method (POST) and providing an example body for pagination ('perPage': 100, 'page': 1). This helps the agent understand how to invoke the tool correctly.

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 clearly states it's a stock position consultation for products, listing specific fields. It explicitly says it's a query that does not alter data, and the verb 'Consulta' (consult) is specific. Among sibling tools like feegow_entry_product or feegow_get_product_position, this tool is clearly for listing products with filters and pagination.

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 explains how to use pagination and filters, and notes that despite using POST it's a read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool vs alternatives like feegow_get_product_position for a single product.

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