list_products

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

The description adds the behavioral detail of automatic pagination, which is helpful. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or non-destructive, and no annotations are provided to clarify this. For a list operation, this is a minor gap.

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 short sentences with no wasted words. The primary action is front-loaded in the first sentence, and a key behavioral detail follows in the second.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and automatic pagination. It does not describe the structure of returned data, but given the tool's simplicity, this is acceptable. It could be improved by explicitly noting it is a read operation.

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?

With zero parameters, the input schema provides no information. The description compensates by explaining the purpose and pagination behavior, adding meaning beyond the schema. Baseline for no params is 4, and this description meets it.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'Xcode Cloud products' within the context of the configured App Store Connect account. It naturally distinguishes itself from sibling tools which focus on builds, logs, and workflows.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention when not to use it. However, given that no sibling tool lists products, the usage context is somewhat implied.

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