Récupère plusieurs produits par identifiants en un seul appel (lot). À utiliser lorsque vous disposez DÉJÀ des identifiants de produits/déclinaisons et souhaitez leur prix/disponibilité actuels. 100 identifiants maximum. Lecture seule.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ids | Yes | ||
| context | No | Localisation facultative : langue (BCP 47), devise (ISO 4217), address_country (ISO 3166-1 alpha-2). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses 'Lecture seule' (read-only) and a 100-ID maximum, which are valuable behavioral constraints. However, it does not mention error handling for invalid/unknown IDs, behavior when exceeding the limit, or the exact response structure, leaving some gaps.
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 four short sentences, each with a distinct purpose: main action, usage context, batch limit, and read-only nature. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, contains no filler, and is easy to scan.
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?
For a batch lookup tool, it covers purpose, usage, limit, read-only status, and hints at return content (price/availability). Since there is no output schema, a bit more detail on the response shape would help, but the description is still reasonably complete for this moderate complexity 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 50%: the context parameter has detailed descriptions, but ids lacks formatting details. The description adds meaning by clarifying IDs refer to products/variants and by imposing the 100-identifier limit. Still, it does not fully compensate for the missing ids format or context default behavior.
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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Récupère plusieurs produits par identifiants en un seul appel (lot)' clearly indicating batch retrieval. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on existing product/variant IDs and returning current price/availability, contrasting with a search-oriented tool.
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?
It provides explicit guidance: use when you already have IDs and need current price/availability. It implies this is for batch lookup rather than search, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it (e.g., for single ID retrieval), so a stronger contrast would improve it slightly.
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.
All three tools have clearly distinct purposes: get_product retrieves details for a single product by ID, lookup_catalog fetches multiple products by IDs for pricing/availability, and search_catalog performs free-text and filter-based searches. No ambiguity.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (get_product, lookup_catalog, search_catalog) using snake_case, making them predictable and easy to understand.
Three tools is minimal but appropriate for a demo store's catalog-focused scope. Each tool serves a distinct need without being overly sparse.
The tool set covers core catalog operations: single product lookup, batch retrieval, and search with filters. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no category listing), but the set is sufficient for product discovery and detail retrieval.