list_brands

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It clarifies that this is a read-only listing operation, states the output contains numeric ids, and gives a scale ('550+'), which helps set expectations. It does not mention pagination or response structure, but for a simple list endpoint these are not critical gaps.

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, no filler. The main purpose and output shape are front-loaded, and the second sentence gives actionable guidance without redundancy. Every clause contributes value.

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 tool with zero required parameters, a simple optional query, and no output schema, the description provides enough information to call it correctly and use its results effectively. It names the output format, scale, and integration points with sibling tools.

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% because the query parameter is already fully documented as an optional case-insensitive substring filter with examples. The description adds context about how ids are used downstream but does not need to repeat parameter details already present in the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('List'), names the exact resource ('Chrono24 watch brands'), and states the output includes numeric ids with a scale ('550+'). It also distinguishes the tool from siblings by showing how the returned ids/names feed into search_listings and find_models.

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 explicitly tells the agent how to use the result: pass an id to search_listings' manufacturerIds or a name to find_models. It does not explicitly state when list_brands should be chosen over alternatives, but because it is the only brand-listing tool among the siblings, the intended usage is clear.

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