list_external_products

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

With no annotations, the description reveals the HTTP method (GET), path structure, and that productName is sent as a query param. It omits pagination or error details, but for a simple list tool, this suffices.

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 sentences efficiently convey purpose and requirements. The inclusion of HTTP method/path is slightly redundant but not harmful.

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 list tool with two required params and no output schema, the description covers essentials: action, target, and required inputs. No response format details, but acceptable.

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 coverage is 100%, so description adds little. The note that productName is sent as a name query param is a minor HTTP binding detail, not significantly enhancing semantics.

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 it lists external products for an integration, distinguishing from siblings like 'list_products' (likely internal) and 'get_external_product' (single product).

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 specifies the endpoint and required parameters, implying use when needing a list filtered by integration and product name. It lacks explicit comparison to alternatives, but the context is clear.

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