list_listings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scope context (results are limited to your own shop, filtered by state, defaulting to active) but says nothing about pagination behavior, result volume, or ordering, which matter for a list operation with limit/offset.

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?

A single sentence with zero filler, with the resource and the state scoping front-loaded. Nothing is repeated from the title or schema and no sentence is wasted.

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 simple read-only list tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate: it establishes scope, filter, and default. It leaves the agent uninformed about paging through large result sets and about the shape of the returned listings, which the absence of an output schema makes more consequential.

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%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It covers only the state filter and its default; the limit and offset parameters are documented nowhere in prose, and the description does not explain that the enum includes inactive/sold_out/draft/removed/expired beyond what the schema enumerates.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('List your shop's listings') plus the scoping dimension ('by state'), which clearly separates it from single-item siblings like get_listing or mutating ones like update_listing. It stops short of explicitly naming an alternative list/search tool, so it is clear but not fully sibling-differentiated.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the agent can infer this is the tool for enumerating its own shop's listings, and the '(default active)' note tells it what happens when state is omitted. There is no explicit when-not guidance, no mention of paging through results, and no named alternative for other listing queries.

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