get_purchased_products

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

With no annotations, the description must cover behavioral traits. It only labels it as 'read' and reveals it's a stub. No info on required permissions, data freshness, rate limits, or side effects. Minimal disclosure for a complex tool with 7 parameters.

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?

Very concise at two sentences. Front-loaded with purpose and scope. However, it omits important details that could be added without bloating (e.g., output format). Still, no fluff earns a high conciseness score.

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 7 optional parameters including a nested object, no output schema, and no behavioral cues, the description is woefully incomplete. Agent cannot understand return format, filter behavior, or how parameters interact. Needs substantial expansion for a tool of this complexity.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; agent must rely solely on parameter descriptions. No examples or clarifications.

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 retrieves products purchased from ad clicks, with a prefix indicating it's a read operation. The name is self-explanatory and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_orders or get_product_details.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Only a note that it's hosted endpoint only, which is a deployment constraint, not usage context. Could benefit from mentioning it's for ad-attributed purchases, contrasting with other product/order tools.

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