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

With no annotations and no output schema, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It lists the return payload fields, which is real disclosure, but says nothing about the read-only nature, missing-handle behavior, permissions, or data freshness/locale effects on prices and availability.

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 zero filler; the resource and returned fields come first and every word 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 lookup tool with no output schema, listing the returned fields is adequate, but the totally undocumented handle parameter and absent when-to-use guidance leave an agent guessing on a required input.

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 explain the single 'handle' parameter, but it never mentions it or clarifies that handle is a product URL slug rather than an ID or name. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema's type declaration.

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 pairs a clear verb ('Get') with a specific resource ('product') and enumerates the data returned (variants, prices, availability, images). This distinguishes it from search_products in intent, though it never explicitly states it retrieves a single product by handle.

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 guidance on when to use this versus search_products (browse/query) or get_collection (browse by collection). No prerequisites, no exclusions, and no routing hints are provided.

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