dataproduct_get

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that the response includes access status per output port and inlines data contracts, giving useful insight into what the tool returns. However, it does not mention error handling, permissions, or rate limits, leaving some behavioral aspects unspecified.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by Args and Returns sections. It is well-structured without filler, though the Returns section might be considered redundant given the existence of an output schema.

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 get-by-ID tool with an output schema, the description covers the core functionality and return contents. However, it lacks explicit usage guidance relative to sibling tools and does not address error cases or edge conditions, making it minimally 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 only parameter, data_product_id, is described as 'The data product ID,' which merely restates the schema's property title. With 0% schema description coverage, the description was expected to compensate with additional meaning (e.g., format, usage, examples), but it fails to provide any beyond the obvious.

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 'Get a data product by its ID,' using the verb 'Get' and identifying the specific resource (data product) and key (ID). It distinguishes from sibling tools like dataproduct_search (search vs. get) and dataproduct_query (query vs. get).

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?

Usage is implied: the description says 'by its ID', indicating it is for direct retrieval by ID. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives (e.g., searching by name), nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites.

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