get_productRetrieve full product details including variants, prices in all currencies, inventory, categories, collection, and tags using a product ID.
Product detail – variants, prices in all currencies, linked inventory items, categories, collection, tags.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| product_id | Yes | Product ID (prod_…) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds useful context by listing the returned data fields (variants, prices, inventory, categories, collection, tags), which helps since no output schema exists. It does not cover auth, rate limits, or error behavior.
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 compact phrase that front-loads the resource and efficiently enumerates the returned details. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.
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?
The tool is a simple read-only lookup with a fully documented parameter and clear annotations. The description compensates for the missing output schema by listing return fields, though it omits usage guidance relative to siblings.
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 parameter already documents the 'prod_…' ID format. The description adds no further meaning about the product_id parameter, so the baseline of 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 resource and return content ('Product detail – variants, prices in all currencies, linked inventory items, categories, collection, tags'), making it clear this is a single-product retrieval tool. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like list_products or update_product.
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 when-to-use guidance is provided. It does not mention alternatives such as using list_products to browse or update_product to modify, leaving the agent to infer the tool's appropriate context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.