jumbo_get_product_recommendations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the returned content categories but says nothing about authentication needs, result limits, ordering, or how the three modes differ behaviorally (e.g., precedence if both sku and query are passed).

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?

A single well-formed sentence with the returned resource front-loaded. It is efficient and wastes no words, though the trailing promotions clause makes the sentence slightly dense.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is the only source of behavioral context, and it covers the return content but omits usage routing and behavioral constraints. Adequate but with clear gaps for a three-mode tool with optional params.

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 100%, and the parameter descriptions already explain each mode (SKU vs query vs promotions_only) with examples. The description adds no syntax or semantic detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Get') with a clearly named resource ('product recommendations, alternatives, and cross-sell suggestions') and enumerates the three input modes (SKU, query, promotions). It is easy to grasp what the tool returns, though it never explicitly distinguishes itself from close siblings like jumbo_search_products or jumbo_get_promo_digest.

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 hints at three usage modes (by SKU, by query, or promotions_only) but provides no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no naming of alternatives. An agent must infer from the schema alone whether this or jumbo_search_products / jumbo_get_promo_digest is the right call.

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