get_store_product

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to repeat these. It adds that the tool returns a JSON product object including variants array, which provides additional behavioral context. However, it does not disclose other traits like authentication or rate limits, which are not expected given the read-only nature. Overall, adequate but not rich.

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 concise and well-structured: purpose statement, usage guidance, parameter descriptions, and return value note. Every sentence adds value, with no unnecessary repetition or fluff.

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 that an output schema exists, the description adequately explains the return value as a JSON product object with variants. It also provides parameter sourcing. It does not cover error conditions or limitations, but for a straightforward retrieval tool, it is sufficiently complete.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description carries the burden. It provides meaningful guidance for the two required parameters (store_id from list_ecommerce_stores, product_id from list_store_products). It does not describe the optional 'account' parameter, but the majority of parameters are well-explained, compensating for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves a single product from a store with its variants and details. It uses specific verbs ('retrieve', 'inspect') and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'list_store_products' which is for browsing and discovering product IDs.

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 explicitly advises using 'list_store_products' to browse and discover product IDs, providing a clear alternative for when to use this tool vs. others. It does not mention all possible alternatives but is sufficient for the primary use case.

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