get_product_details_by_url

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries burden: it explains the separate server query, the mapping requirement, and the return type (list of product dictionaries or error string). It does not mention read-only status or potential side effects.

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?

Description is concise: three sentences plus clear Args/Returns sections, no redundant information, and main purpose is front-loaded.

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?

Covers key aspects: separate server, mapping issue, parameters, return type. Lacks details on error types or structure of returned dictionaries, but overall sufficient for a tool with 2 params and no output schema.

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 description adds minimal value over the schema; it states product_urls is a list of URLs and fields is optional with default all fields. Since schema coverage is 0%, description does compensate but lacks further detail like valid field values or format.

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 verb 'retrieves detailed information' and the resource 'specific products using their URLs', distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_available_fields and query_store_products.

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?

Provides explicit context about the separate Product Data Server and the necessary URL-to-ID mapping, but does not directly compare to alternatives or specify when not to use this tool.

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