wafle_stores_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds useful context: the security scoping ('configured key can see'), the admin-only restriction for tenant-level MCP, and the specific fields included in the response. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose. The first sentence immediately explains what the tool does; the following sentences add high-value usage guidance and an access caveat. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description enumerates the response fields (id, slug, name, domain, brand color, payment/shipping config, gateway IDs, contacts), making the return format clear. With zero parameters, mature annotations, and explicit usage/admin notes, the description is fully adequate.

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 the schema explicitly states 'No parameters.' with 100% coverage. The description doesn't add parameter details because none exist. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and nothing in the description detracts from that.

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 action ('List all wafle stores') and a clear scope ('the configured key can see'), and lists the key fields returned. It distinguishes from sibling tools like wafle_stores_get (single store) and wafle_stores_create by focusing on listing all accessible stores.

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?

Explicitly says to use this as the first call for store-related questions and before any per-store action because the slug is needed. It also contrasts with wafle_stores_get for per-tenant MCP clients, providing clear when-to-use and alternative guidance.

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