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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false), so 'Read-only and public' is largely redundant, but 'public' usefully signals no auth is required. The field-by-field enumeration of the return payload is real behavioral disclosure, especially valuable since no output schema exists.

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 front-loaded sentence with the purpose stated first, followed by the payload listing. The enumeration is long, but with no output schema each listed field does meaningful work rather than padding.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly carries the burden of describing what is returned, and it does so comprehensively. It stops short of covering failure behavior for an unknown or invalid product_id, which is the remaining gap for a single-parameter 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 coverage is 100% and the schema already documents that product_id accepts a 'store:slug' id, SKU, or unambiguous slug. The description's mention of 'stable product_id/SKU' adds only marginal reinforcement beyond that, so the 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 verb and resource ('Return the full factual detail for one product') and enumerates the exact payload, so an agent knows precisely what comes back. It does not name a sibling to contrast with, so the boundary against get_product_preview or search_products must be inferred from the 'one product' scoping.

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?

There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance at all. The description never says to use search_products to find an ID first, nor how this differs from get_product_preview, which returns a preview URL that is also listed here.

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