product_group_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond the annotations: that the -1 sentinel switches from single-group lookup to top-level listing, and where results land (`children`). It says nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, or pagination, keeping it at a solid 3.

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?

Two compact sentences with no filler; the primary purpose leads and the group_id special case follows. Effectively sized for a two-parameter read tool.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value documentation is not required, and the description sensibly stops at naming the key fields. Combined with readOnly/openWorld annotations and the -1 behavior note, an agent has enough to call it correctly; only account_key's role is unaddressed.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It explains group_id semantics well (default -1 means list all top-level), but account_key is left entirely unexplained in both schema and description, so half the parameters remain opaque.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('product group') and enumerates the returned fields (name, parents, child groups), so an agent knows exactly what it retrieves. It doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from the nearby category_get_attributes sibling, which is a minor gap given the largely unrelated sibling set.

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 does provide an actionable default behavior: passing group_id=-1 lists all top-level groups. That is real usage guidance, but it is scoped to one parameter value rather than stating when to reach for this tool versus alternatives, so guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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