get_product

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

The verb 'Get' makes the read-only nature evident, and the second sentence clarifies that the result provides product information for verification. It does not discuss error behavior or authentication, but for a simple single-ID lookup the essential behavioral contract is clear.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The core action and scope are front-loaded, and the second sentence adds a practical usage context that helps an agent decide when to invoke the tool.

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 a fully described schema, this description provides enough context to call it correctly. It is slightly incomplete because there is no output schema and no note about failure behavior or returned data shape, but the simplicity of the operation limits the impact.

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 covers the only parameter, productId, with a description already. The tool description only repeats the 'by ID' concept and adds no new semantic detail such as format, constraints, or source information, so it stays at the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Get details about a specific Webhallen product by ID.' It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling search_products, which is about discovering products rather than retrieving one exact product by ID.

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?

Gives a concrete use case: verifying product info before adding to a shared wishlist. It does not explicitly say when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select this tool appropriately.

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