conduyt_list_products

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only listing but does not disclose pagination behavior, default/max result sizes, ordering, or what the response contains — all relevant for a list endpoint the agent will call repeatedly.

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?

Two short sentences with the purpose front-loaded and the filterable dimensions following. No filler, though it is arguably terse enough to leave gaps rather than being optimally informative.

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 fully documented parameters, the description covers purpose and filters adequately. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it should say more about return shape or pagination behavior to be fully complete.

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 all four parameters (page, search, per_page, is_active) are already documented in the schema. The description only restates the filter/search capability, adding no syntax or semantic detail beyond what structured fields provide, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (products in the catalog), making the core operation unambiguous. However, it does not distinguish itself from siblings like conduyt_get_product or conduyt_search, leaving the agent to infer that this is the enumeration endpoint.

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 second sentence hints at usage ('Filter by active status or search by name'), which implicitly tells the agent when the optional params matter. But there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over conduyt_get_product for a single item, nor any stated limits or prerequisites.

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