Fetch a Foran product

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the required id format, which is genuinely useful behavioral context, but says nothing about what 'full details' contains, error behavior for a stale id, or whether the city component affects results.

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 sentence with no waste, front-loading the action and immediately following with the one constraint that matters. Nothing is padded or repeated from the title.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the critical input format but leaves the return shape and failure modes unstated. It is adequate to make the call but not complete enough to set expectations about the response.

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 0% and the schema only types id as a string, so the description carries the full burden. It does so by specifying the exact composite format product:<item_id>:<city>, which an agent could not infer from the schema alone. It stops short of explaining what each segment means or whether city is optional.

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 pairs a specific verb (fetch) with a specific resource (full product details) and clarifies the scope as 'full details' versus the summary results from search. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling foran_product_details, which an agent could easily confuse with this tool.

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?

It implies the usage sequence by saying the id is 'returned by search', which tells the agent this is a follow-up call. It gives no explicit when-not guidance and never names foran_product_details or foran_search_products as alternatives, so the routing decision is only partially supported.

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