bos_store_show

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavioral traits. It does not state that the tool is read-only, what it returns, or any side effects. The brief text offers no transparency beyond the basic action.

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 extremely concise at three words, which is appropriate for a simple retrieval tool. It is front-loaded and to the point, though it may sacrifice some clarity for brevity.

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 has only one required parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks information about the return value structure or any constraints, which would help the agent use it correctly.

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 should compensate. It does not explain the 'store_id' parameter, its format, or how to obtain it. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description adds no value beyond the schema.

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 'Get store details' clearly indicates the verb (Get) and resource (store details). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like bos_store_list (list stores) or bos_store_nearby (find nearby stores), leaving ambiguity about the scope (single vs. multiple stores).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as bos_store_list or bos_store_staff. No mention of prerequisites, expected input, or scenarios where it should not be used.

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