get_product

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses what data is returned (all variants, pricing, media, availability) and a precondition for merchantUrl, but doesn't mention auth requirements, error behavior, rate limits, or explicit read-only confirmation.

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 sentence with no filler. The verb and object appear first, followed by a compact list of included detail types, making the tool's purpose immediately scannable.

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 the low complexity (2 required params, no nested objects) and no output schema, the description covers the main expected return categories and the key prerequisite. It could be more complete with error/not-found behavior, but that is a minor gap for a simple retrieval tool.

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 100%, so both params (merchantUrl, productId) are already documented. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the schema; it only reiterates the merchant URL must be previously discovered, which is already in 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('full details for a specific product from a UCP merchant'), and lists the detail types (variants, pricing, media, availability). The phrase 'specific product' distinguishes it from the sibling search_products, which suggests finding products rather than retrieving one.

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 usage context by stating merchantUrl 'must be previously discovered', hinting that discover_merchant should be run first. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over search_products or compare_products, nor name alternative tools.

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