Collection products

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

The annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world behavior; the description adds the collection-source dependency and supported collection types. It does not clarify paginated retrieval, and "every product" could imply an exhaustive single response despite the schema specifying 12 items per page.

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 single sentence is compact, front-loaded with the operation, and uses parenthetical examples efficiently. There is no filler or redundant explanation of the three parameters.

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?

Together with the complete schema and safety annotations, the description supplies enough context for a straightforward collection-listing call. Its completeness is limited by the lack of explicit pagination or exhaustiveness guidance and any sibling-selection guidance, especially with no output schema to clarify result granularity.

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%, and id, page, and sort already document their formats, defaults, and constraints. The description largely repeats the id's origin and collection types, with "see all" list as only a small addition, so the high-coverage baseline applies.

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?

"List every product" identifies the operation and resource, while "one promotion collection" and the examples establish precise scope. Naming ss_promotions as the source also distinguishes it from the general search, category, and product 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 description establishes a clear workflow: obtain a promotion collection from ss_promotions, then list its products. It does not explain when to prefer ss_search, ss_category, or ss_product, so the guidance is contextual rather than exhaustive.

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