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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does real work: it discloses the 10-store cap, the ordering semantics with and without coordinates, the meaning of stores_total, and a caution not to affirm availability when availability_status is unknown. It omits what happens if the product is not found, whether all params are optional, and any pagination/limit control beyond the fixed 10.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then behavior, then the availability caveat; each sentence adds information. Slightly dense, and the final sentence reads as policy instruction rather than tool description, but nothing is wasted.

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 return shape; it does partially by referencing stores, stores_total, and availability_status. However, it never states that all three inputs are optional or how the product is identified, leaving a meaningful gap for a detail-fetch 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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains lat/lon behavior well (proximity vs. arbitrary ordering), but niar_id — the identifier for "a specific product" — is never mentioned, leaving the most important parameter's role and format unexplained.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Get details of a specific product and the stores that carry it"), which is clearly distinct from the sibling search/store tools. It never names a sibling explicitly, so the agent must infer that products-search-nearby is the search counterpart.

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?

Gives concrete when-to-use guidance: pass lat and lon for the 10 nearest stores, omit them to get 10 in no particular order, with "(recommended)" signaling the preferred path. It adds an operational rule for unknown availability, but offers no routing advice versus products-search-nearby or stores-get.

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