list_products

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation and the description states the returned data includes download and crash totals. It does not mention ordering, pagination, data freshness, or whether the list is unfiltered, but these gaps are less critical for a parameterless listing tool with an output schema.

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 two sentences: the first states the primary purpose, and the second provides essential domain context. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 parameterless list tool with an output schema present, the description is complete enough. It covers what is listed, what metrics are included, and how products relate to apps, so an agent can invoke it confidently.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter detail for the description to add. The product-versus-app explanation gives useful semantic context for the objects being returned, which satisfies the baseline for a no-parameter tool.

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 identifies the tool as listing products with download and crash totals. It also differentiates products from apps, which directly distinguishes this tool from the sibling list_apps.

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 gives clear context by explaining that products are the business-level view and apps are per-store listings underneath. It does not explicitly name list_apps as the alternative, but the conceptual separation effectively routes an agent to the right tool.

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