get_product_details

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It lists the fields returned (description, brand, colors, etc.), giving a good idea of the output. However, it doesn't mention edge cases, error behavior, or performance characteristics. For a read‑only tool, this is acceptable but not exceptional.

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 exactly two sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second provides the usage hint and enumerates the returned data. It is front‑loaded, contains no fluff, and every word adds value.

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 tool with a single parameter and a clear output list, the description is complete. It tells the agent how to obtain the required sku_ids and what to expect in the response, leaving no critical gaps for correct invocation.

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 schema already describes the sku_ids parameter as 'List of SKU ids (UUIDs from search results)'. The description repeats this by telling the agent to use search_products results, but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool retrieves 'full product details' for 'Decathlon NL SKUs', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like search_products (which searches) and get_reviews (which fetches reviews) by indicating that this tool returns comprehensive product information.

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 explicitly instructs to use sku_id values returned by search_products, establishing a clear usage context (post‑search). While it doesn't explicitly say when not to use or mention alternative tools, the guidance is sufficient for an agent to know when this tool is appropriate.

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