get_products_user

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

The description adds that it is a GET endpoint and returns a list of products, beyond the annotations which already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. However, it lacks details on pagination, ordering, or potential limits.

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 concise (two sentences plus endpoint line) but includes the redundant title line. The emoji and endpoint help orientation. No unnecessary information.

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 no output schema, the description partially covers return values ('list with all the products') but omits field details, error cases, or prerequisites. Annotations fulfill some completeness but context remains basic.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage for the single parameter 'id', the baseline is 3. The description only repeats 'user id', adding no extra meaning beyond the schema's 'User id or email'.

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 the verb ('Get') and resource ('products of user'), specifying the user is identified by id. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_users_product' by focusing on products per user, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 all products of a specific user, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'get_users_product' for the inverse) or provide exclusions.

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