Retrieve detailed LinkedIn product information by ID. Returns structured JSON data for analysis or integration.
Get LinkedIn Product info by ID. Returns detailed product information from LinkedIn by product ID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | LinkedIn Product ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It only mentions returning 'detailed product information' without specifying the nature of the data, any side effects, or prerequisites. The tool is likely read-only, but this is not stated.
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 very concise, consisting of two short sentences. While efficient, it could be more informative without becoming verbose, such as mentioning the output content.
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 (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate but lacks details about what 'detailed product information' includes. An agent would benefit from knowing the structure of the response.
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% for the single parameter 'id', which is described as 'LinkedIn Product ID'. The description adds no new meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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 action ('Get'), the resource ('LinkedIn Product info'), and the method ('by ID'). It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like linkedin_company and linkedin_showcase.
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 alternatives, such as when to prefer linkedin_company or linkedin_showcase. The description only states the retrieval method ('by ID').
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.