psastore_product

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the output is 'normalized product detail' and that the URL is fixed server-side, which adds some context. However, it does not disclose potential errors (e.g., invalid handle), auth requirements, rate limits, or what 'normalized' means in practice. The description is minimally transparent but leaves important behavioral aspects unspecified.

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 two sentences with no extraneous words. It front-loads the core purpose, adds the normalization detail, and clarifies the parameter's nature in a compact manner. Every sentence earns its place, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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 single-parameter tool, the description covers the essential purpose and parameter semantics, but it lacks usage guidance and does not describe the return format beyond 'normalized product detail'. Since there is no output schema, agents might benefit from knowing what fields are included. The absence of alternatives and edge-case behavior leaves the tool incomplete in terms of full operational context.

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 already provides a description ('Product handle') at 100% coverage, which would set a baseline of 3. The tool description adds value by clarifying that the handle is 'the product's URL slug', which is crucial for agents to understand how to source the handle from product URLs. This extra context goes beyond the schema and meaningfully helps with correct invocation.

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 resource 'PSA Store product', specifying that it returns normalized product detail for a single product handle. It also distinguishes itself by noting it targets one product, which differentiates it from sibling tools like psastore_products that likely return multiple items. The inclusion of the storefront URL adds context without ambiguity.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as psastore_product_recommendations, psastore_products, or psastore_collection_products. It only mentions that the storefront URL is fixed server-side, which is a parameter detail rather than usage direction. An agent would have to infer the tool's purpose from the name and sibling context.

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