get_sizing_and_fit_guide

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden. It discloses the type of content (charts, measurements, fit guidance) and product line coverage, but it does not describe response format, how results are organized, or any edge-case behavior (e.g., what 'All' returns). It provides basic but not comprehensive behavioral detail.

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 a single, information-dense sentence that front-loads the action ('Get') and the outcome ('detailed sizing charts, measurements, and fit guidance'). Every word contributes; there is no redundancy or 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional param, no output schema), the description adequately covers what the tool returns and for which categories. It could have briefly mentioned what types of measurements (e.g., chest, waist, foot length), but the current level is sufficient for most use cases and consistent with the 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 schema fully describes the 'category' parameter with an enum and a description. The description adds no additional semantics beyond mentioning the product categories, which are already listed in the enum. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description doesn't need to compensate, but it also doesn't enrich the meaning.

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 ('Get') and resource ('detailed sizing charts, measurements, and fit guidance') and specifies the exact product categories covered. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_armornglory_product_details or search_armornglory_products, which focus on product info or search rather than sizing.

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 this tool is for sizing-related inquiries but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives. It doesn't mention exclusions or conditions, but the scope (sizing for ArmorGlory products) is inferable from the tool name and description. It lacks explicit 'when to use / when not to use' language.

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