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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and external-data behavior are covered. The description adds the returned field set (title, description, price(s), images, metadata), which is useful context, but nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, or key-precedence behavior beyond 'id wins over slug' (which lives in the schema).

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 dense sentence with the lookup mechanism front-loaded and no filler. It is slightly elliptical ('One Stripe product'), which costs a point on clarity 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?

The tool is simple (3 params, none required) and no output schema exists, so the description carries the return-shape burden and does so by enumerating the fields. Missing only auth/permission context, which is minor for a read-only lookup.

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 description coverage is 100% with only three parameters, so the schema already documents id, slug, and siteId including the 'id wins over slug' precedence rule. The description's mention of 'id or metadata.slug' restates the schema rather than adding format or edge-case detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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 resource (one Stripe product) and the two lookup keys (id or metadata.slug), plus what the record contains. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling stripe_search_products, so it stops short of a 5.

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 phrase 'by id or metadata.slug' implies this is the single-record fetch and nudges toward one of the two keys, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no named alternative such as stripe_search_products for bulk needs.

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