Store overview

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond that by enumerating the payload categories returned, which is valuable since there is no output schema. It stops short of detailing structure or shape, keeping it at a 4.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler. The return contents come first and the usage hint second, which is the right front-loading for a discovery tool.

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?

With no output schema present, the description carries the burden of describing return values and does so by listing each category. Combined with annotations that cover the safety profile, an agent has everything needed to call this 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 takes no parameters, so there is nothing to document and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies a zero-argument, whole-store lookup.

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 gives a specific verb ('Returns') and enumerates the exact resource categories (regions/currencies, sales channels, stock locations, shipping options/profiles, return/refund reasons). No sibling tool in the list exposes store configuration, so an agent can immediately distinguish this from the order/customer/product CRUD tools.

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?

It states clear usage context: 'A good first call to learn the IDs other tools need,' which tells the agent to invoke this up front for ID discovery. It does not name any exclusion or alternative, but for a read-only metadata tool there is no meaningful competing sibling to route away from.

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