keepa_get_variations

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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only describes the output content but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, any limitations, or potential side effects. For a data-retrieval tool this is minimal.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core purpose and key output details without any wasted words. It is an excellent example of concise, readable documentation.

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 read-like lookup with only two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's core function. It could be slightly more complete by clarifying the domain default or return structure, but overall it satisfies the primary need.

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%: both 'asin' and 'domain' are described in the schema. The tool description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, placing it at the baseline of 3.

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 the specific resource 'variation family tree for an ASIN', and elaborates with 'parent/child relationships and attributes' which distinguishes it from siblings like keepa_get_product or keepa_check_variations.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the similar sibling keepa_check_variations or when not to use it. The description only states what it does without any context or alternative recommendations.

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