get_product

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses it returns variants, images, descriptions, stock, pricing. This is transparent for a read operation, though no mention of side effects (likely none). Could be clearer about read-only nature, but still strong.

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?

Single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds meaning (Get, full details, specific product, enumerated fields). Ideal conciseness.

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?

Tool has 2 simple required params, no output schema, no nested objects. Description covers main return fields. For a straightforward retrieval operation, it is complete enough. Could mention if product_id supports other formats, but not a major 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 coverage is 50% (company_id no description, product_id described). Description doesn't elaborate on company_id or how to obtain it. Product_id description matches schema ('ID or slug from search results'). Baseline is 3 given moderate coverage; description adds minimal extra value.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get full details for a specific product' with specific verb (get) and resource (product), and enumerates attributes (variants, images, descriptions, stock, pricing). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_products (searching) and list_categories (categories).

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 when needing full product details, and sibling tool names provide context for alternatives. No explicit when-not-to-use guidance, but for a simple retrieval tool, context is sufficient.

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