Get In App Product

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Get details' which implies a read operation, but does not disclose any side effects, required permissions, or whether the product might be in draft/archived state. No information about errors or authentication is provided.

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 a single sentence with no fluff, front-loading the action. It is concise but could slightly expand on context; however, for a simple get operation, the brevity is appropriate.

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 tool has a simple parameter set and an output schema, the description is sufficient for basic usage. However, it lacks information about when this tool is preferred over sibling tools or any behavioral details, making it minimally complete. The output schema likely explains return values, so no need for that in the description.

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 100% (both 'sku' and 'package_name' are described with one-line meanings). The description adds no further semantics but doesn't need to because the schema is fully descriptive. Baseline of 3 applies as there is no additional 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 'Get details of a specific in-app product' clearly states the verb 'get' and resource 'in-app product', making it easy to understand. It is distinct from siblings like 'list_in_app_products' or 'batch_get_in_app_products' due to 'specific', though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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. For example, it doesn't mention that this is for a single product lookup as opposed to batch operations, nor does it clarify when to use list vs get. There is no 'when to use' or 'when not to use' context.

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