Retrieve a read-only list of all sub-merchants to review your payment processing accounts. Use pagination and sorting to manage large datasets.
Lists all sub-merchants. This tool ONLY reads data.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| count | No | Number of sub_merchants to return | |
| order | No | Sort order | |
| since_token | No | Pagination token |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description states it 'ONLY reads data', which is consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation but adds no new behavioral details beyond what the annotation and schema provide. No mention of pagination, ordering, or other side effects.
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 extremely concise at two sentences, with no redundant information. The purpose is front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to quickly understand the tool's function.
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?
Given the lack of an output schema, the description should ideally mention what the returned list contains. It does not provide any return value information, leaving the agent to infer the structure. With a simple list tool and good annotations, this is adequate but not complete.
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%, so the description adds no additional meaning to the parameters beyond what is already in the schema. Baseline score of 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 states the action ('Lists') and resource ('sub-merchants'), and emphasizes it's read-only. This distinguishes it from sibling tool 'spreedly_sub_merchant_show' which retrieves a single sub-merchant.
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 does not provide any explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or sibling comparisons are mentioned; usage is only implied by the tool name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.