Get product

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the read-only nature, and the description adds little beyond restating 'Fetch'. It does not disclose behavior such as not-found handling, response shape, or any location scoping effects beyond what the schema already provides.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to the core meaning and the tool's purpose is immediately understandable.

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?

For a simple read-only get-by-id tool, the schema and annotations cover a fair amount. However, the description is minimal: it lacks explicit alternative routing, error/not-found expectations, and any clarification of the optional locationId scope, leaving the agent to infer some context.

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 only 50%, and the description does not compensate for the undocumented productId parameter beyond calling it an 'id'. It also does not explain locationId or its default behavior, which the schema does partially cover, but the description adds no new parameter meaning.

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 ('Fetch'), a clear resource ('product'), and a scope ('single ... by id'). This clearly distinguishes it from list_products and other get-style siblings, so an agent can tell what it does.

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 phrase 'by id' implies the tool should be used when a specific product ID is known and one product is needed. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to ghl_list_products for listing or searching alternatives.

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