zalando_product

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors: the sku-to-canonical-page resolution, the requirement that market must match the originating storefront, and the absence of a default market. It also notes that a sku is typically only listed on markets that carry it. This goes beyond basic schema info, though it does not cover error scenarios or authentication needs.

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 (three sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Each sentence earns its place, covering the return contents, sku provenance, and market constraint without fluff. Excellent structure for an agent to parse quickly.

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 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is highly complete. It explains what the tool returns, how to source the sku, and the critical market matching rule. It could optionally mention error handling, but the absence is not a significant gap given the low complexity.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context by explaining that sku comes from sibling search/category tools and that market must correspond to the storefront where the sku was found, with no default. This enriches the bare schema descriptions and helps the agent construct correct parameter values.

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 tool retrieves a single Zalando product with normalized details including brand, description, images, and per-size price/availability/GTIN. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Zalando product'), and the specificity of the returned fields distinguishes it from sibling search and category tools.

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?

It explicitly instructs the agent to pass the sku returned by zalando-search or zalando-category, and explains the market must match the storefront where the sku was found. It points to zalando-markets for the full reference list, providing clear guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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