products_batch_read

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states this is a read operation, implying it's non-destructive, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or response format. The description is minimal and lacks crucial operational context for a batch read tool.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the main purpose. However, the second sentence is somewhat redundant, reiterating the idProperty usage without adding new information. Overall, it's efficient but could be more structured to clarify parameter roles.

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?

Given the complexity (4 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the purpose of most parameters, doesn't describe the return format, and omits behavioral details. For a batch operation with multiple inputs, this leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to use the tool effectively.

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 only mentions the 'idProperty' parameter, explaining it's for 'retrieving records by a custom unique value property.' The other three parameters (propertiesWithHistory, productIds, properties) are undocumented in both schema and description, leaving their purpose and usage unclear. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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's purpose: 'Read a batch of products by internal ID, or unique property values.' This specifies the verb ('Read'), resource ('products'), and scope ('batch'), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like products_read (singular) and products_list (list all). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from products_search, which might also retrieve products based on criteria.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions retrieving by 'internal ID' or 'unique property values' but doesn't compare to products_read (single product), products_list (all products), or products_search (filtered search). There's no mention of prerequisites, constraints, or typical use cases.

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