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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is fully covered by structured data. The description adds only the domain constraint that the product is 'legal' (OJK-licensed); it says nothing about behavior on an unknown id or about response size.

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 no filler, which is well structured. Its brevity borders on under-specification rather than verbosity, but nothing unnecessary is present.

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 simple single-parameter read tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the essentials are present but thin. An agent still has to guess where the id comes from and how this differs from ojk_products and ojk_app_get.

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?

One parameter with 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate and only partly does: 'by id' confirms the parameter is an identifier without explaining that it is the OJK product id obtained from ojk_products. The numeric type and minimum are left entirely to the schema with no added 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 states a specific verb and resource ('Get a single legal investment product') and narrows the domain with 'by id', which separates it from the illegal-entity siblings (ojk_illegal_get, ojk_illegals). It does not name ojk_products or ojk_app_get, so the distinction from the list/other-get tools is left to inference.

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?

'by id' implies this is a lookup-after-listing tool, which is a reasonable usage signal. However, it never says to use ojk_products to obtain the id first, nor when to prefer this over sibling getters like ojk_app_get.

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