ghl_product_store_get_stats

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds the endpoint URL and OAuth scopes, which are useful but not deep behavioral insights (e.g., no mention of pagination, rate limits, or what 'other stats' includes). No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three sentences covering purpose, details, and endpoint/scopes. The first sentence is slightly redundant with the title, but overall compact and front-loaded with the essential purpose.

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?

No output schema is present, yet the description only vaguely mentions 'other stats' without detailing the response structure. It does not explain how parameters affect results (e.g., collectionId filtering). For a 5-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete.

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 80% (4 of 5 parameters have descriptions). The description does not add any extra semantic context for parameters like altId, altType, search, or collectionIds beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Fetch Product Store Stats' and elaborates on what it retrieves (total products, included, excluded, other stats). It is specific to product store stats and implicitly distinguishes from sibling write tools (e.g., set_inclusion, set_priority) by being a read operation, though not explicitly differentiating from other stats 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ghl_product_list or ghl_product_get. Does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios where other tools would be more appropriate. The readOnlyHint is present but not leveraged in the description.

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