quince_product

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that data is 'normalized,' covers what is included (color swatches, hex codes, sizes, variant-level price/stock/SKU), and clarifies the handle format. It does not address error behavior or rate limits, but for a simple product-fetch tool it provides substantial transparency.

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 compact and front-loaded: the core action and return summary come first, followed by return contents, then parameter guidance. Every sentence contributes either to what the tool returns or how to invoke it correctly, with no filler.

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 one-parameter, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description covers the essential workflow and return shape thoroughly. It could be slightly more complete by noting error cases or implying that quince_search is a prerequisite, but the handle-source hint already provides adequate 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with a useful description already, giving baseline 3. The description goes beyond the schema by explaining that handle is the product's URL path on quince.com, providing a concrete example (women/cashmere/cashmere-crewneck-sweater), and pointing to quince-search as the source, adding meaningful context.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Get a Quince product') and then enumerates exactly what data is returned, including title, description, review summary, options, and variants. It clearly distinguishes itself from quince_search (which provides handles) and sibling tools like quince_product_reviews or quince_product_faq, which cover different aspects of a product.

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 explicitly states that the handle comes from quince-search's products[].handle field, establishing a clear workflow: search first, then call this tool for full details. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives (e.g., reviews, FAQ) or stating when not to use it, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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