get_product

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the data source ('merchant-synced'), the returned fields, and the pick subfields. It also warns about staleness with 'Never quote price from memory,' which is a meaningful behavioral trait.

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 tight and front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence contributes useful information: scope, return fields, q's purpose, and the usage instruction. There is no filler or repetition.

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 low-complexity tool with no output schema, it covers the return values and optional parameter well. It could strengthen completeness by stating error behavior or explicitly pointing to search_products or list_allowed_stores as discovery sources, but those are not critical.

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%, so the description must supply meaning. It explains q as the owner's search phrase and qualifies store_id with 'allowlisted store.' product_id is largely self-explanatory, and the required identifier pair is explicitly named.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get one ProductCard by product_id + store_id.' It clearly scopes the tool to a single-product lookup and distinguishes it from broader search-oriented siblings by emphasizing exact identifiers and the downstream action create_purchase.

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?

It provides explicit when-to-use guidance: call it to confirm price and stock before create_purchase, and never quote price from memory. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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