check_product

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

No annotations provided, so description must convey effects. 'Record history/events' implies mutation (writing history), but doesn't clarify whether this is a side effect or what exactly is recorded. No mention of permissions, rate limits, or reversibility.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. However, it is arguably under-specified for a tool with an output schema and side effects. Concise but not sufficiently informative.

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 one parameter and an output schema, the description should provide context on what 'check' entails and what the output looks like. It mentions 'record history/events' but leaves ambiguity about the return value and side effects.

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 has one required parameter 'product_id' with no description (0% coverage). Description does not explain what product_id represents or how to obtain it, adding no meaning 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 states 'Check one product' indicating a single-product operation, and 'record history/events' suggests additional logging. It distinguishes from sibling 'check_all' (checks multiple) but 'check' is vague compared to more specific verbs like 'resolve' or 'list'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_products' or 'price_history'. The description implies use for a single product with history recording, but doesn't exclude other scenarios or mention when not to use it.

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