get_productGet the full public record for one product by its stable id (e.g. "prod_3") or slug (from search_products). Includes price in integer minor units, availability, validity/redemption summary, seller store, and the canonical product URL. Read-only — never creates a checkout or order.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Product id ("prod_3") or slug ("google-maps-blueprint") | |
| language | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable clarity by stating 'never creates a checkout or order', which addresses a common misuse and reassures the agent about side effects. This goes beyond the generic annotation.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and resource, and every sentence adds value. It efficiently communicates the tool's purpose, input scope, output fields, and side-effect safety.
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 the lack of an output schema, the description compensates by listing key return fields (price, availability, validity, seller store, URL). It covers the essential context for a simple get tool, though it omits any mention of the language parameter's purpose.
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 covers the id parameter well with examples, and the description adds 'stable' and 'from search_products', providing marginal value. However, the language parameter is left entirely undocumented in both schema and description, leaving ambiguity about its effect on the response.
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 the tool gets the full public record for one product, specifying the resource (product) and the action (get). It also differentiates from sibling tools like search_products (which finds products) and get_place/get_store (which target other resources).
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 explains how to identify a product via a stable id or slug, and explicitly references search_products as the source of slugs, providing clear usage context. It doesn't list exclusions or alternatives, but the context is sufficient for an agent to decide when to use this tool.
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 has a clearly distinct purpose: search_places and search_products handle search across different entity types, get_place/get_product/get_store handle retrieval by identifier, and list_cities provides metadata. There is no overlap or ambiguity between tools.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case: list_, search_, get_. The verbs are semantically appropriate (list for enumeration, search for queries, get for retrieval) and the nouns clearly identify the resource being operated on.
Six tools is well-scoped for a read-only search and retrieval API covering two entity types (places and products) plus supporting metadata (cities and stores). Each tool serves a distinct need, and the count is neither too small to be useful nor too large to manage.
The tool set provides complete coverage for the stated purpose of discovery and retrieval: users can list coverage cities, search for places and products, retrieve full records for both, and access store details. The read-only nature is explicit, so there are no missing CRUD operations. The workflow from city to search to retrieve to store is fully supported.