vt_get_product

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds value by listing the return fields (description, inclusions, etc.) but does not disclose other behaviors like potential errors, rate limits, or the fact that it returns a single product object. Given the annotations cover safety, a 3 is appropriate.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that conveys the tool's purpose and output. Every word contributes meaning with no redundancy.

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 simple retrieval tool with no output schema, the description adequately lists the main content returned. It could mention that it returns a single product object, but the listed fields (description, inclusions, etc.) give sufficient completeness.

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 100% - both parameters are described with patterns, examples, and meanings. The description does not add extra semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is correct.

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 a specific verb ('Get full details') and resource ('one Viator product by product code'), and lists the included data fields (description, inclusions/exclusions, etc.), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like vt_search_products or vt_list_destinations.

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 implies use when you have a product code and need comprehensive product details. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, the context of sibling tools (e.g., vt_search_products, vt_get_availability_schedule) makes the intended use clear.

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