products_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral context: the consistent shape with a resource, the dependency on settings for price fields, and the recommendation for follow-up with product_get. No contradiction with annotations.

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 well-structured, starting with the main purpose and then providing details. It is thorough but not overly verbose; a few sentences could be trimmed without loss, but overall it is efficient and front-loaded.

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 without an output schema, the description covers the key aspects: what is returned (field list), filtering via category_id, price mode dependency, and follow-up guidance. Missing details like pagination or sorting are not critical but prevent a perfect score.

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 input schema already describes both parameters with 100% coverage. The description for category_id merely repeats the schema's explanation ('filter to products in that category') without adding new semantic meaning. The description does not enhance understanding of the 'site' parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 all ecommerce products with a specific set of simplified fields. It distinguishes from sibling tool product_get by noting its role for per-variant stock and emphasizes consistency with the voog://products resource. The read-only nature is explicitly stated.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use (list all products) and when-not-to-use (use product_get for per-variant stock). Offers context on filtering via category_id and critical guidance on price fields depending on settings.price_entry_mode, including a call to ecommerce_settings_get to determine the mode. Also advises customer-facing pricing to use effective_price.

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