Get product

Does 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 covered. The description usefully adds that the response is a full detail payload enumerating related entities, but says nothing about not-found/error behavior or how the linked entities are shaped.

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?

One dense sentence, front-loaded with the resource name followed by the payload contents; no filler. The long field list is justified since there is no output schema, though it reads as a comma dump rather than structured 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?

With no output schema, the description's enumeration of returned fields is the only source of return-value information and it covers the main ones. Single-parameter tool with annotations covering safety, so little else is needed, though routing guidance against list_products is absent.

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 there is a single required product_id with its format documented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no further meaning about the identifier beyond what the schema provides.

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 ('Product detail') and then enumerates the data it returns: variants, prices, inventory items, options, categories, collection, tags, images, sales channels. That clearly separates it from list_products and update_product, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and never mentions the alternative siblings (list_products for browsing, update_product for changes). The detail-fetch use case is only inferable from the name and the field list.

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