list_products

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It clearly states this is a read-only listing operation and defines its scope ('all products in the store'), including the returned fields. It does not disclose pagination, ordering, or authorization, but for a simple zero-parameter list tool, the behavioral surface is adequately covered.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and every word adds value. The supporting 'answers...' phrase is concise and clarifies the tool's purpose without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

This is a simple parameterless list tool with an output schema available. The description fully explains what data is returned and the intended use case. Sibling tools are financial summaries, so this catalog-focused description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema description coverage is 100% trivially, so the baseline is 4. The description adds useful semantic value by explaining what the output represents, which is sufficient for a parameterless tool.

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 identifies the operation as 'list all products' and specifies the exact fields returned (name, permalink, price, published state, sales count). The phrase 'what am I actually selling right now?' gives an outcome-oriented purpose that distinguishes this catalog tool from the sibling financial tools (sales, revenue_summary).

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 implies a clear use case ('what am I actually selling right now?') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over the sibling sales and revenue_summary tools. It gives no exclusions or alternative references, so usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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