get_product_details

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

The description and readOnlyHint align: the tool is a read-only lookup with no side effects. It does not detail error cases or response format, but the read-only nature is clear and no contradictions exist.

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 a single, compact sentence that efficiently communicates purpose and scope without extraneous detail. The list of included attributes is well organized 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?

The description gives enough detail for an agent to know what information will be returned, even without an output schema. It lacks explicit mention of return format or error behavior, but for a simple SKU lookup the context is sufficiently 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 single sku parameter is fully explained with a concrete example and is consistent with the description's 'by SKU' phrasing. The schema covers 100% of the parameter, so no semantic gaps remain.

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 full product details by SKU, enumerating specifications, price, promotion, warranty, and stock by condition and location. This distinguishes it from narrower siblings like get_current_price or check_availability.

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 implies when to use the tool (when full product detail by SKU is needed), but it does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives such as search_products, get_current_price, or compare_products. There is no direct 'use this instead of X' guidance, though the scope is inferable.

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