Shopify product counts by status

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

The description discloses the underlying method (productsCount) and the output categories, which helps. However, with no annotations, it does not mention whether this is read-only, any rate limits, or how counts are calculated. It leaves some behavioral aspects unstated.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the method and the list of counts returned. It contains no filler and is easy to parse.

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, no-parameter tool, the description is complete: it specifies what it does, how it does it, and what the output includes. The absence of an output schema is offset by the explicit enumeration of counts, and no further context seems necessary.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema reflects that. Baseline for zero parameters is 4; the description does not need to add parameter semantics, and it doesn't, which 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 states the tool's purpose: returning total, active, draft, archived, and unlisted product counts using the productsCount method. It explicitly distinguishes itself from paginated product queries and from generic GraphQL operations, making it unique among siblings.

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 phrase 'Uses productsCount—not paginated products' implies that for product count needs, this tool should be used instead of paginating through products via GraphQL. This gives clear context, though it stops short of explicitly naming when-not-to-use or listing alternative tools.

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