loyverse_get_itemRetrieve a single catalogue item by ID, including all variants, to access complete product information in one call.
Fetch one catalogue item by id, including all of its variants.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| item_id | Yes | The item id. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds that the result includes all variants, which is beyond the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations. It also aligns with the read-only nature, and no contradictions exist with the annotations.
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?
One sentence, no fluff, front-loaded with the core action and scope. It is appropriately concise.
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 one parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently states what the tool does and what it returns (item with variants). No critical information is missing.
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 documents item_id as 'The item id.', so the description adds no additional parameter semantics. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 applies.
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?
States the specific action (Fetch), the resource (one catalogue item), and the method (by id), and notes it includes variants. This clearly distinguishes it from list_items and get_variant tools.
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 have a specific item_id and need the item with its variants. It doesn't explicitly compare to alternatives like list_items, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.