Retrieve full details for a TitanStore product by SKU. Example SKUs: TS-001, TS-002, TS-003, TS-004, TS-005.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sku | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
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 states 'Retrieve' implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose any behavioral aspects such as authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or what happens if the SKU is invalid. The output format is not described beyond 'full details', and the output schema exists but is not detailed in the description.
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 extremely concise with two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource. Example SKUs are given but do not waste space. Every sentence serves a purpose.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (1 parameter, output schema exists), the description is adequate but lacks completeness. It does not mention error handling, rate limits, or the structure of the returned 'full details'. The presence of an output schema reduces the burden, but the description could still add value by noting common use cases or limitations.
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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only says 'by SKU' and provides example SKUs (TS-001, etc.), but does not explain the format, constraints, or pattern of the SKU parameter beyond these examples. No additional semantics are provided.
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 clearly states the tool retrieves full product details for a TitanStore product by SKU, using a specific verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'full details'. It distinguishes from the sibling 'search_products' which likely returns a list, making the scope clear.
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 description implies usage for getting details of a single product by SKU, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like 'search_products' or mention when not to use it. The example SKUs provide some guidance but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use.
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.
Each tool has a distinct purpose in the purchase flow: searching products, getting details, adding to cart, checking out, and confirming payment. No overlap in functionality.
All tool names follow a clear verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., add_to_cart, get_product). Even 'checkout' is a standard verb that fits the pattern.
Five tools cover the core e-commerce workflow without redundancy. The number is appropriate for the server's purpose of handling basic store operations.
The set covers the essential purchase lifecycle from search to payment confirmation. Minor gaps like cart modification or order history are absent but not critical for a basic store.