Get a product

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

Annotations already cover the read-only, idempotent, non-destructive profile. The description adds valuable behavioral context by specifying the 'menu-editor view' and that modifier group IDs are included, which is not visible from annotations or the schema alone. It does not contradict the annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every phrase earns its place, and the most important identifying details are stated immediately.

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?

The core fetch semantics are clear, and the output schema plus annotations cover much of the safety and return-shape context. However, locationId's role is undocumented, and there is no explicit guidance about when not to use this tool, leaving a small but meaningful 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. 'By id' clarifies productId, but locationId is left completely unexplained: the agent cannot tell why it exists or when to pass it. With two parameters, half of the parameter semantics are missing.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch one product (menu-editor view) by id.' It also states the view and included data ('including its modifier group ids'), which distinguishes it from mutation or management siblings like update_product, delete_product, and list_menus.

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 use case is implied: call this when you need a single product by its ID and its modifier groups. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion conditions, such as using update_product for modifications, so the guidance is only implicit.

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