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

Without annotations, the description itself must convey behavior; it correctly implies a read operation and adds that the result includes full details and current price. It does not disclose error handling, authorization requirements, data freshness, or whether get_product_v2 should be used for more current data.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded, and without filler. Every element—specific lookup, ID, full details, current price—earns its place.

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 one-parameter retrieval tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is nearly sufficient: an agent that has a product UUID knows exactly what to expect. The only notable omission is guidance around alternatives such as get_product_v2, but the simplicity of the operation keeps this minor.

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?

The sole parameter id is fully described by the schema as a Product UUID, and the description merely refers to 'its ID' without adding new details. With 100% schema coverage, this meets the baseline but adds no extra semantic value.

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?

Clearly identifies a specific product lookup by ID and notes that full details and current price are included. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the closely named get_product_v2 sibling, so it misses full sibling differentiation.

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 its ID' implicitly tells an agent this is the tool to use once a product ID is known. There is no explicit mention of when to prefer get_product_v2 or search_products, nor any when-not-to-use guidance.

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