product_get

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to emphasize safety. It adds that the tool returns an error response but no further behavioral traits. With annotations covering the safety profile, a 3 is appropriate as the description adds minimal behavioral context.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose, bullet-pointed return details, a usage note, and an 'Args' section. It is concise (5 short sentences for main body) and front-loaded.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values are documented elsewhere. The description still enumerates return fields clearly and mentions error responses. It covers all necessary information for a retrieval tool with good annotations.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context: product_id comes 'from product_search results' and store_id is for 'store-specific pricing'. This adds helpful context beyond the schema, justifying a 4.

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 'Get comprehensive details for a single product' and lists specific attributes returned. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling 'product_search' tool, saying 'Use this when you need more information than product_search provides.'

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 clear guidance on when to use this tool (when more detail is needed than product_search) but does not explicitly list when not to use it or mention alternatives other than product_search.

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