get_product

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose that it is a read operation returning a complete record. However, it omits details about error handling, required permissions, or pagination/return structure, which leaves behavioral uncertainty.

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 object and gives the key qualifying detail (Elorus ID) efficiently.

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 get-by-ID tool with no output schema, the description is adequately complete: it identifies the resource, the identifier type, and the result scope ('complete record'). It does not cover edge cases or return format, but the tool's simplicity makes this acceptable.

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 product_id has no schema description, but the description adds that it is an 'Elorus ID' and applies to both products and services. This provides domain-specific meaning beyond the property title alone.

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 identifies the action ('Get'), the resource ('product or service'), and the scope ('single ... by its Elorus ID'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_products, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 you already have an Elorus ID and need the complete record, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like list_products. There is no when-not guidance or mention of alternative tools.

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