列出销售渠道

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to repeat safety traits. It adds a small amount of context by specifying that only publish-available publications are returned, but it does not disclose pagination or response behavior.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. For a simple list operation with one optional parameter, this is appropriately concise.

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?

There is no output schema and the description does not explain what fields are returned (e.g., publication IDs needed by publish_product) or how the 'first' parameter behaves. The read-only annotations reduce safety concerns, but the lack of parameter semantics and return-value context leaves the definition incomplete.

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 0%, and the description does not mention the only parameter, 'first'. An agent is left to infer that 'first' is a page-size/limit control solely from the integer type, minimum, maximum, and default.

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 states a specific action ('列出' list) and resource ('Shopify publications') with a scope qualifier ('可用于发布商品', available for publishing products). It clearly distinguishes from product-focused siblings like shopify_search_products, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

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 is given about when to choose this tool over siblings, nor when not to use it. The phrase 'available for publishing products' implies a pre-publish step, but there is no explicit context or mention of alternatives.

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