Get a product page

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value the annotations cannot: it discloses the returned payload shape (launch history with day ranks and upvotes, latest comments) and a citation obligation for pageUrl, though it omits comment count or result-size limits.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the resource and its contents, followed by the usage rule and the citation requirement. The content enumeration is dense but every clause helps an agent decide relevance, so nothing is wasted.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing return values and does so concretely, plus a citation rule. The only gap is how much comment data comes back and whether large pages are truncated, which an agent might want to know.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter already documents both the slug form and the exact-name fallback with an example. The description's 'by slug or exact name' merely restates the schema, adding no syntax or matching-behavior detail beyond it, so baseline 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 a specific verb and resource ('the full public page of one product on CodeDebut') and enumerates exactly what the page contains (description, website, pricing, platforms, launch history, comments). This lets an agent distinguish it immediately from list-style siblings like search_products or get_launches.

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?

'Use it after any other tool when the user wants details on one product' gives a clear sequencing rule and the triggering intent. It stops short of naming a when-not case or explicitly routing browsing queries to search_products, so it is clear context without full exclusions.

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