shopify_get_article_by_idRetrieve a complete Shopify article by its ID, including HTML body, SEO metadata, author, tags, image, and parent blog reference. Use for fetching article details for display or management.
Full article with HTML body, SEO, author, tags, image, and parent blog reference.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| articleId | Yes | Article GID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v4.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds useful return-shape context (HTML body, SEO, parent blog reference), but with no output schema it could say more about completeness/nulls for missing fields.
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?
A single front-loaded clause that lists the payload contents without filler. It is appropriately short for a simple one-parameter read, though it omits an explicit verb like 'retrieve'.
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-record read with one trivially-documented param and full safety annotations, the description covers the essentials. With no output schema, however, it could better characterize the return (e.g., what happens when the article is absent), leaving a modest gap.
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?
Only one parameter (articleId) with 100% schema coverage describing it as an 'Article GID'. The description adds nothing about the ID beyond what the schema states, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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 name and description together state a specific verb+resource (get a single article by ID) and enumerate what comes back (HTML body, SEO, author, tags, image, parent blog). It implicitly separates itself from the list-oriented sibling shopify_get_articles, but never names that sibling or explicitly contrasts 'single article' vs 'list of articles'.
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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternatives are named. An agent must infer from the name that this is the single-record retrieval versus shopify_get_articles for listing, and nothing addresses what to do if the ID is unknown.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.