run_target_products_questions

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral context. It usefully discloses the cost model ('1 point per returned record'), but it does not describe return format, pagination behavior (beyond schema), or any rate limits. For a read-only retrieval tool this is adequate but incomplete.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by a key cost note. No wasted words or redundant 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?

Given the tool's low complexity, full schema coverage, and absence of an output schema, the description provides sufficient context about what is returned (questions and answers) and the cost per record. A brief note on return structure would improve completeness, but nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke it.

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. The description only echoes the product identifier requirement ('by TCIN or URL') and adds no new semantic detail about max_items or start_page beyond what the schema provides.

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 names a specific resource (customer questions and their answers) for a specific entity (Target product by TCIN or URL). This distinguishes it clearly from sibling tools like run_target_products_reviews or run_target_products.

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 implies usage for retrieving Q&A content given a product identifier, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as run_target_products_reviews or run_target_products_search. No exclusions or explicit comparison are provided.

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