run_aliexpress_product

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 does add genuinely useful non-schema context — "Flat 5 points per successful run" discloses the cost profile and that billing is per successful run. It says nothing about auth, rate limits, failure behavior, or whether a missing ID errors or returns empty.

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 tight sentences with zero waste: the core purpose leads, and the cost disclosure follows. Nothing is redundant with the schema and no filler is present.

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, listing the return fields (title, price, images, store) is a real contribution that tells the agent what it gets back. Together with the cost note, this is close to complete for a simple single-item lookup; only error/edge behavior is unaddressed.

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 the schema already documents all three parameters, including the product ID/URL format and full enum lists for currency and language. The description adds nothing about currency/language behavior, so baseline 3 applies. Note a small mismatch: the description says "by ID" while the schema also accepts a URL.

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 AliExpress product details") and scopes it to a single item via "by ID," which implicitly separates it from run_aliexpress_product_search. It also enumerates returned fields, making the purpose concrete. However, it never names the sibling search/reviews tools, so differentiation rests on inference.

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 phrase "by ID" implies this is for a single already-known product rather than discovery, which is a usable hint. But there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no pointer to run_aliexpress_product_search for the discovery case or run_aliexpress_product_reviews for reviews.

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