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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: it specifies the exact fields returned and warns that loose-diamond availability is not verified, which is a meaningful limitation an agent should know.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. The core purpose and output fields are front-loaded, and the caveat is placed at the end without disrupting the main signal.

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 single-parameter, read-only tool with rich annotations, the description is complete: it names the input source, the output fields, and the one important reliability limitation. No output schema exists, but the description covers the return value adequately.

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%, and the schema already documents that id must be an exact id from search_inventory, either a Shopify product gid or stienhardt:diamond:SKU. The description repeats the 'as returned by search_inventory' relationship but adds little beyond what the schema already provides, 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Full detail for one Stienhardt product by id.' It also enumerates the returned content (title, price, availability, options, images, URL), which distinguishes it clearly from search_inventory and other sibling tools.

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 makes clear this is for retrieving one product by an id obtained from search_inventory, which tells an agent when to use it. It does not explicitly enumerate when not to use it, but the relationship to search_inventory and the caveat about loose-diamond availability provide adequate contextual guidance.

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