포트원 상점 내 채널 목록 조회

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It states the tool 'retrieves' information, implying read-only, but does not mention any side effects, rate limits, authentication requirements, or what happens if the store does not exist. This leaves significant gaps for a safe operation.

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, concise sentence that conveys the core purpose without fluff. While it could benefit from a more structured format (e.g., bullet points for key details), it is not verbose and avoids redundancy.

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 the presence of an output schema, return values need not be described. However, the description lacks any contextual information about when to use this tool, prerequisites (e.g., valid store ID), or how the 'fields' parameter affects the output. It is minimally adequate for a simple retrieval tool but leaves room for improvement.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters (store, fields) with descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding.

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 the action (get all channels) and the resource (a store's channels). The name and title reinforce this, making it easy for an agent to understand what the tool does. It is distinct from siblings like addTestChannel (create) and getPaymentsByFilter (different entity).

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as addTestChannel or getPaymentsByFilter. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusion criteria, leaving the agent without decision support.

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