b24_products_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. 'Obtiene el detalle completo' makes the read-only intent and the response scope reasonably clear, but it does not disclose error behavior, auth requirements, or any side effects.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, then states the distinguishing condition ('por ID').

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 getter with a single required parameter, the core invocation is covered. However, there is no output schema and no annotation, so 'detalle completo' is vague about the return shape, and the optional webhook_url remains unexplained.

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 only 50%: 'id' is documented, but 'webhook_url' has no schema description. The tool description merely restates the ID relationship and does nothing to explain the webhook_url parameter, leaving a meaningful gap for the agent.

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 ('Obtiene'), a specific resource ('un producto'), and the key access pattern ('por ID'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like b24_products_list, b24_products_create, and b24_products_update.

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 phrase 'por ID' implies the tool should be used when you have a product ID and need full detail, so usage is inferable. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this over b24_products_list or when not to use it.

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