Get Product Ratings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description correctly goes further by disclosing the 60-second cache-sharing behavior and that absent metrics stay unknown rather than erroring. That is genuine behavioral value beyond the structured fields.

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 payload contents and followed by the caching caveat. 'Missing metrics remain unknown' is slightly terse but earns its place by flagging partial responses.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need no prose explanation, and annotations cover the safety profile. The description supplies the caching and partial-data behavior an agent needs, leaving little unaddressed for a single-parameter read 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 0% and the single product_id parameter is only constrained by a regex pattern. The description adds no semantics for the identifier, but the parameter is largely self-explanatory, so a mid-range score is warranted.

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 (Read) plus a well-defined resource (aggregate 0–100 ratings, distribution, recommendation and review/question counts). The word 'aggregate' implicitly distinguishes it from get_product_reviews and get_product_questions, which return the underlying items, though 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?

'Reuses product detail's 60-second observation' tells the agent this call is cheap right after get_product, which is useful context. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance relative to the review/question siblings, so usage remains implied.

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