Get Product Recommendations

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits like ordering, scoring, or limitations. It only says 'recommends' without explaining the recommendation logic (e.g., random, popular, or all products in the category). This lack of transparency could mislead agents.

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 sentence, very concise, with no wasted words. However, it sacrifices clarity and completeness for brevity, making it insufficiently informative.

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 complexity (2 parameters, no output schema, many siblings), the description is overly minimal. It does not specify the output format, ordering, or how recommendations are generated, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 0%, so the description must add meaning to parameters. It does not mention the 'id' parameter (the product ID to base recommendations on) or the 'limit' parameter (max number of recommendations), leaving the agent to infer from the schema's constraints alone.

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 it recommends products based on the same category as a given product ID. The verb 'recommends' and resource 'products' are specific, and while it doesn't fully differentiate from siblings like getProductsByCategory, the purpose is generally clear.

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 usage when needing product recommendations from a product's category, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., getProductsByCategory, getTopRatedProducts). No when-not-to-use or prerequisites are mentioned.

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