hermes_product

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well by disclosing that care, gift and delivery text come as Hermès' HTML fragments, and that sku accepts three distinct forms. It does not mention error handling, rate limits, or locale default behavior, but for a read-only fetch tool these are minor gaps.

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 one dense paragraph with the purpose in the first sentence and parameter detail at the end. The field enumeration is lengthy but every item is informative, and there is no filler or repetition.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description compensates by enumerating the return content and explaining sku formats. It omits locale default behavior and does not explicitly redirect to sibling discovery tools beyond the hermes-products mention, but for a low-complexity two-parameter tool it is nearly complete.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, placing the baseline at 3. The description adds substantial value by spelling out the three accepted sku forms with concrete examples (H252013Z BM, H252013Z BM360, H252013ZvBM) and identifying where the URL identifier originates. Locale is left entirely to the schema's enum.

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 opens with 'Get a Hermès product' – a specific verb and resource – and enumerates the returned fields in detail. It does not explicitly name sibling differentiation (e.g., hermes_products for lists vs hermes_product for single detail), but the singular 'product' and the field list make the scope clear.

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?

Usage is implied: call this when you already have a sku and need the full product detail. The description never states when to prefer hermes_products, hermes_search, or other siblings, and offers no exclusions. It only mentions that the URL identifier comes from hermes-products, which is a light hint rather than explicit routing.

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