get_product

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by specifying the data fields returned (price, stock, ingredients, attributes). Annotations already confirm it's read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the description provides concrete behavioral context.

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?

A single, clear sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and returned data. No extraneous information, perfectly front-loaded.

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 simple tool with one parameter and an output schema (return format assumed covered by schema), the description adequately specifies what is returned. It could be slightly improved by mentioning the parameter, but overall it is sufficient for basic use.

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?

The description does not explain the required 'product_id' parameter, such as its format or how to obtain it. With 0% schema coverage, the description should compensate but fails to clarify the parameter meaning, leaving ambiguity.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource 'one product', listing the specific fields returned (price, stock, ingredients, attributes). This clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like search_products or list_category_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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., search_products). The description implies it's for retrieving details of a specific product by ID, but does not provide context on when to prefer this over listing tools.

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