getProducts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'Get', which implicitly suggests read-only, but it does not mention filtering capabilities, response format, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a tool with five parameters.

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?

The description is concise and front-loaded, but it is arguably under-specified for a tool with five parameters and no output schema. It is not verbose, but it could provide more useful detail without becoming overly long.

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 tool's five optional parameters and absence of an output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not convey the tool's filtering capabilities or what the response contains, leaving the agent with insufficient information to anticipate behavior.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all five parameters, so the description does not need to explain them. However, the description adds no extra meaning about parameter interactions or common usage, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action ('Get') and resource ('retail products'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like getServices or getClasses. It notably adds 'retail' to provide product-type context, but does not specify whether it returns a list or a single item.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks any context about intended use cases, prerequisites, or why an agent should choose this over related getters.

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