Brand page

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

The annotations already declare read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds the useful detail that the brand slug comes from site links, but it does not add much about pagination, rate limits, or return behavior beyond the schema.

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 two tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the key usage constraint. Every sentence adds routing or scope information.

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 rich parameter descriptions and full safety annotations, the definition covers purpose, slug source, and the main sibling alternative. It does not describe the shape of returned product results, but no output schema exists and the remaining gaps are minor.

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%, and the schema already documents slug format, page size, and sort values. The description only reinforces where the slug comes from; it does not add new meaning for page or sort beyond what the schema provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: list products of one brand page on Snapp! Shop. It also distinguishes this from ss_category by explaining that category-scoped brand browsing belongs to the other tool.

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?

It explicitly says to use this tool when the brand slug is known, notes where slugs come from, and routes category-specific brand lookups to ss_category. That is clear when-to-use guidance with a named alternative.

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