run_amazon_product

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses cost ("Flat 5 points per successful run") and enumerates returned data, which substitutes for a missing output schema. It says nothing about rate limits, failure modes, or whether results differ by domain.

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, front-loaded with the capability and followed by the cost note. No filler or repetition.

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?

Listing returned fields compensates for the absent output schema, so an agent knows what to expect. The remaining gap is the domain parameter: the description never notes that data and pricing are marketplace-specific, which matters for this tool.

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 ASIN example and the 19-value domain enum are fully documented in the schema. The description adds the ASIN key but gives no meaning for the domain parameter. 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?

Specific verb-plus-resource ("Get full Amazon product details") keyed by ASIN, with an explicit enumeration of returned fields. The ASIN-keyed framing implicitly distinguishes it from run_amazon_product_search, but no sibling is named outright.

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?

Usage is only implied: "by ASIN" signals you need an identifier in hand, which rules out the search tool by inference. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not clause or mention of run_amazon_product_offers, run_amazon_seller, or other alternatives.

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