Fetch the full source-backed record for one product family by slug (from search_models or lookup_part pageUrl): lifecycle dates per SKU group, every part number, support runway score factors, and the vendor bulletin URLs. Read-only; an unknown slug returns found:false with a hint, never an error.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | Family slug, e.g. "cisco-catalyst-3850". |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It transparently discloses: read-only, unknown slug returns found:false with a hint (never an error), and lists the contents of the response. This is excellent behavioral disclosure for an agent.
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 dense sentences: the first front-loads the purpose and contents, the second adds behavioral guarantees. Every phrase contributes value, with no redundancy or fluff.
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?
For a single-parameter read operation with no output schema, the description fully covers return contents, error handling, and usage context. It is self-sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool 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 schema already provides 100% coverage with a clear example. The description enhances this by explaining the slug's origin (from search_models or lookup_part) and its format, adding meaning beyond the schema's basic type and example.
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 it fetches a full source-backed record for one product family by slug, listing specific content (lifecycle dates, part numbers, support runway score factors, vendor bulletin URLs). It differentiates from siblings by specifying the slug comes from search_models or lookup_part pageUrl, making its role as a detail retrieval tool distinct.
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?
The description provides explicit guidance on obtaining the slug from search_models or lookup_part pageUrl, implying a workflow. It also states the read-only nature and error behavior. While it doesn't explicitly say when-not-to-use alternatives, the flow is clear enough to guide the agent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool serves a distinct purpose: bulk_check for batch part lookups, lookup_part for single parts, search_models for discovery by name, get_family for full family details, and list_vendors for vendor enumeration. No two tools overlap in their primary use case, and cross-references in descriptions further clarify boundaries.
Four of five tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (get_family, list_vendors, lookup_part, search_models). bulk_check deviates slightly as a compound modifier + noun, but all names are lowercase snake_case and semantically intuitive, making the set predictable overall.
Five tools is ideal for a focused read-only database. The set covers discovery, single lookup, batch lookup, and deep record retrieval without unnecessary redundancy or bloat.
The tool surface fully covers the domain of a hardware EOL database: list_vendors confirms coverage, search_models finds families, lookup_part and bulk_check handle part lookups, and get_family provides comprehensive lifecycle data. No obvious operations are missing for the stated read-only purpose.