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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It adds a meaningful behavioral qualifier: 'public', indicating the tool only returns public products and likely requires no special auth. This is useful beyond the schema. It does not describe return details or error behavior, but for a simple get operation, it's sufficient.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema. The description is nearly complete: it names the resource and parameter, and implies the return value (the product). It could mention what happens if the product is not found or is private, but this is not essential for a basic getter.

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 input schema already provides complete coverage (100%) for productId with a concrete example ('soc2-starter-pack'). The description merely restates 'by product id' without adding additional parameter syntax or constraints beyond the schema, so it lands at the baseline.

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 states a specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('public product'), and the required parameter ('by product id'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_blog_post or list_products.

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 implies usage: when you have a product id and need a single public product. It does not explicitly contrast with list_products or mention when not to use it, but it is fairly clear. There is no explicit exclusion or alternative, so it meets only the baseline.

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