Get a SKU
twicecommerce_get_skuGet one SKU by id. Admin API: GET /v1/admin/skus/{skuId}.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sku_id | Yes | The SKU id (uuid, from twicecommerce_list_skus). |
twicecommerce_get_skuGet one SKU by id. Admin API: GET /v1/admin/skus/{skuId}.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sku_id | Yes | The SKU id (uuid, from twicecommerce_list_skus). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
readOnlyHint=true already declares the safe read profile. The description adds the underlying endpoint path (GET /v1/admin/skus/{skuId}), but says nothing about not-found/error behavior or return shape.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and backed by the endpoint, with zero filler.
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 annotated read with a fully documented single parameter and no output schema, the description is sufficient to invoke correctly, though it omits error/return behavior.
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 coverage is 100%, so the sku_id uuid and its provenance are already documented. The description only restates 'by id' and the path template, adding nothing beyond the schema.
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?
States a specific verb (get) and resource (SKU) scoped to a single id. It does not explicitly contrast with twicecommerce_list_skus, but the singular 'one SKU by id' implicitly distinguishes it.
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?
Implies a single-record lookup and the schema notes the id comes from twicecommerce_list_skus, but the description itself gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not (e.g., use list_skus to browse).
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.