Commerce Store List

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it adds nothing: it does not say whether results are paginated, ordered, capped at a default, or subject to permissions. The page_limit/page_offset parameters imply pagination, but the description never confirms or explains that behavior.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and free of filler, but for a tool with two undocumented pagination parameters it is under-specified rather than truly concise. Minimal viable, no more.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but the description still omits pagination semantics and any read-safety or permission context. With zero annotations and 0% schema coverage, this leaves real gaps for an agent invoking the tool.

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 0%, so the schema documents neither parameter beyond its type and default, and the description does not mention pagination at all. An agent gets no guidance on what page_limit/page_offset mean, their defaults, or their interaction.

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 pairs a clear verb ('List') with a specific resource ('commerce stores'), so the agent knows exactly what operation runs. It does not, however, distinguish itself from sibling commerce_store_get or commerce_store_list-adjacent tools like commerce_product_list, leaving the reader to infer scope from the name alone.

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?

There is no statement of when to call this instead of commerce_store_get (single store) or any other retrieval sibling, and no mention of pagination or filtering context. The agent must infer usage purely from the tool name.

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