product_cards

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It implies a read-only lookup and discloses the 50-item batch ceiling, which is genuinely useful operational context. It says nothing about authentication, per-item failure behavior, or whether missing uids are omitted or error out.

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 short sentence with the batching constraint front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though this brevity is part of why key semantics like store_type go uncovered.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is fairly excused. For a tool with an undocumented store_type dimension affecting pricing and 0% schema coverage, the description is too thin: it omits what store_type changes, whether card prices differ by store, and how partial results are handled.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that product_ids are uids and that at most 50 should be passed per call, which is helpful. The second parameter, store_type (defaulting to ONLINE), is never mentioned anywhere, leaving its effect on pricing entirely undocumented.

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?

"Priced summaries for a list of product uids" names the resource (product cards) and the payload type (priced summaries) with enough specificity to distinguish it from a single-item tool like product_detail. However, it never explicitly contrasts itself with product_detail or search_products, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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 parenthetical "one call per 50" gives concrete batching guidance, which is real usage value. But there is no statement of when to prefer this over product_detail or search_products, and no mention of prerequisites such as needing product uids from a prior search.

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