Product details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one behavioral nuance about the data (stock with the exact count when low) but says nothing about failure modes, auth, or staleness for a tool that hits a live catalog.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and the payload list, then the usage note and the sibling pointer in two short trailing lines. The parenthetical field enumeration is slightly over-long but every element maps to a real field.

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?

An output schema exists and the description still spends most of its text enumerating return fields, which is partly redundant. It nonetheless covers trigger, scope, and the reviews alternative, so nothing an agent needs in order to invoke it is missing.

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% and the single parameter already documents its origin and format ("product id from ab_search / ab_browse, e.g. 6963"). The description adds no syntax or range guidance beyond that, so the 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?

States a specific verb+resource ("Get one product's record") and enumerates the exact payload: price/discount in Toman, stock, per-variant price and stock, brand, categories, rating and key facts. This is clearly separable from the list-oriented siblings ab_search and ab_browse.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger ("Use after ab_search / ab_browse when the user picks a product") and routes a related need away to another tool ("Customer reviews: ab_reviews"). The when-to-use condition and the alternative are both named.

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