Store info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that the payload covers name, URL, currency, platform versions, and active gateways, which is useful context but no detail on shape or reliability. With annotations carrying the bar, a 3 fits.

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?

A single economical clause with no wasted words, and the key subject ('Store name, URL, currency...') is front-loaded. It is a fragment rather than a complete statement, which slightly weakens the lead.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must convey what comes back, which it does at a field-list level. However, it never says the result is a single object or that these are configuration values, leaving the response shape ambiguous. For a zero-param read tool this is adequate but incomplete.

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 zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. The listed fields are not inputs, so restating them does not constitute parameter semantics.

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 is a bare field list ('Store name, URL, currency, WooCommerce/WordPress versions and active payment gateways') with no verb, so it only implies retrieval. Given the name 'store_info' and the readOnlyHint, an agent can infer it reads store configuration, but nothing in the text explicitly says 'returns' or 'gets'. It is distinguishable from siblings only by subject matter.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of an alternative, and no precondition. The agent must infer that this is the entry point for store-level metadata rather than, say, sales_summary or list_products.

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