keepa_get_product

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates a read-only operation with 'Fetch' and enumerates the return fields, which is helpful. However, it does not disclose any potential side effects, authorization needs, rate limits, or token usage, which could be relevant for a Keepa API tool.

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 with the action and purpose front-loaded. The list of return fields is a concise enumeration without unnecessary detail. 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 tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete: it states what it does, the range of ASINs, and the key return fields. However, it does not explain the effect of optional parameters like domain or stats_days, and the variations field could be complex without an output schema, leaving some ambiguity.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema; it mentions '1-100 ASINs' which is already encoded in minItems/maxItems, but does not elaborate on domain or stats_days parameters. The schema already handles parameter semantics adequately.

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 tool fetches current product data for 1-100 ASINs, which is a specific verb+resource. It lists the returned data fields (title, brand, prices, BSR, rating, buy box, images, features, variations), distinguishing it from sibling tools like keepa_get_price_history or keepa_get_buy_box that focus on specific subsets.

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 usage for current product data lookups, but does not explicitly say when to use this tool over alternatives. It doesn't mention exclusions or provide guidance such as 'for historical data use keepa_get_price_history'. The context is adequate but not explicit.

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