Produktvarianten
get_variantsAlle Varianten (z.B. Stange/Packung) der Versionsgruppe eines Artikels mit Gebinde und Umrechnungsfaktor.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| artikel_id | Yes | Artikel-ID eines Produkts der Gruppe. |
get_variantsAlle Varianten (z.B. Stange/Packung) der Versionsgruppe eines Artikels mit Gebinde und Umrechnungsfaktor.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| artikel_id | Yes | Artikel-ID eines Produkts der Gruppe. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only describes output content, not behavioral traits like read-only, auth requirements, or limits.
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?
A single, concise sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without waste, though language is German.
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?
Adequate for a simple retrieval tool, but lacks details on pagination, errors, or response format, given no output schema.
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?
Though schema coverage is 100%, the description adds context ('Versionsgruppe', 'Gebinde und Umrechnungsfaktor') beyond the schema's parameter description, enhancing meaning.
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 retrieves all variants of a product's version group, including packaging and conversion factor, distinguishing it from siblings like get_product.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_product or search_products, leaving the agent without context for tool selection.
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 targets a distinct function: inventory checks, cart creation, product search, order management, loyalty, support. No overlap among search_products, list_products, and get_product; similarly, list_orders and request_address_change are unique.
All tools follow a verb_noun pattern (e.g., check_availability, create_cart, link_account) with consistent snake_case and English verbs, even though the shop is German. No mix of conventions.
19 tools is slightly above the typical 3-15 range for a focused server, but the number is justified by the breadth of shop functionality (product browsing, orders, cart, loyalty, guides, support). Not excessive.
Covers core shopping flows: product discovery, cart creation, order tracking, and account linking. However, missing tools for cart modification (add/remove items), order cancellation/returns, and checkout. These gaps may cause agent failures.