Swagger: Get Portal Product

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds no further behavioral context such as auth requirements, response characteristics, or side effects; it mostly restates that this is a retrieval operation.

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 opening sentence is clear and concise, but the Parameters section duplicates the input schema exactly. Not every sentence earns its place, so the description is acceptable but not tightly optimized.

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 single-parameter, read-only, idempotent get operation with an output schema and safety annotations, the description is largely sufficient. The main gap is lack of routing guidance versus sibling product tools, which is already accounted for in Usage Guidelines.

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%, and the description's parameter block repeats the schema's productId description verbatim. Since the schema already documents the UUID or 'portal-subdomain:product-slug' format, the description adds no new semantic meaning beyond the structured input.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve information about a specific product resource.' The word 'specific' distinguishes it from list-type operations, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools like swagger_list_portal_products.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as swagger_list_portal_products or swagger_get_portal. The phrase 'specific product resource' only implies a get-by-id use case; no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative routing are provided.

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