get_wineFull registry record for one wine: producer, region, appellation, classification, grapes, community rating, and the AI tasting profile when the wine has been enriched. Vintage-neutral (bottles carry the vintage). Call after search_registry when the user wants depth on a specific wine.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| wine_id | Yes | Registry wine id from search_registry or a bottle's wine |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. Description adds behavioral context: vintage-neutral, AI tasting profile conditionally included, and lists returned fields. Provides useful detail beyond 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?
Two concise sentences: first describes output, second gives usage guidance and a behavioral note. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.
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?
Given low complexity (1 param, no output schema), the description provides sufficient information: fields returned, when to use, and vintage nuance. Could mention what happens if wine not found, but overall 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?
Single parameter wine_id has full schema coverage. Description reinforces its source (from search_registry or bottle's wine) and suggests usage order, adding context beyond the schema description.
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?
Description clearly states the tool retrieves a full registry record for one wine, listing specific fields. It differentiates from sibling tools like search_registry by specifying 'Call after search_registry when the user wants depth on a specific wine.'
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?
Explicitly says to call after search_registry for depth on a specific wine, giving clear context. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the sibling list and context cover most cases.
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 addresses a distinct concern: registry search, wine detail, vintage-specific drink windows, similarity recommendations, guide listing, guide reading, and server metadata. No two tools serve the same purpose, and the descriptions clearly indicate when to use each.
Most tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (list_guides, read_guide, search_registry, get_wine, get_source_info, find_similar_wines). 'drink_window_for' is an outlier, using a noun phrase instead of an imperative verb, which introduces a minor inconsistency.
With seven tools, the server is well-scoped and avoids bloat. Each tool provides a distinct capability, and the count is appropriate for a wine registry server covering search, details, drink windows, similar wines, guides, and metadata.
The core registry workflow is well covered: search_registry for identification, get_wine for details, drink_window_for for aging advice, and find_similar_wines for recommendations. However, multiple descriptions reference search_bottles for user-owned bottles, yet that tool is not provided, leaving a notable gap for user-specific queries.