Update a product's price (and optional compare_price) in the authenticated store. Requires Bearer token. WRITE.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| price | Yes | New price in DZD. | |
| product_id | Yes | Product id. | |
| compare_price | No | Optional old/compare price. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false (write), idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. Description adds 'Requires Bearer token' and reaffirms 'WRITE', but no new behavioral traits beyond annotations. For a mutation tool, this is adequate but not exceptional.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action verb. No redundancy or unnecessary words. Efficient and easy to parse.
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 3-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential action, authentication, and write context. It does not mention return values or success confirmation, but given the tool's simplicity, this is a minor gap.
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% with clear descriptions for each parameter (e.g., 'New price in DZD.'). The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it only mentions 'optional compare_price' which is already documented. Baseline 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?
Clearly states 'Update a product's price (and optional compare_price) in the authenticated store.' The verb 'Update' and resource 'product's price' are specific, and the scope is well-defined. No ambiguity.
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?
Provides authentication requirement ('Requires Bearer token') and hints at write operation ('WRITE'). However, no explicit guidance on when to use versus siblings or when not to use. Missing exclusions or alternative tool suggestions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a specific function with clear boundaries. No two tools overlap in purpose.
Most tools follow verb_noun pattern (e.g., create_product, delete_product), but some are noun_noun (cod_profit, order_risk) and 'publish' is a bare verb, causing minor inconsistency.
12 tools cover product management, store creation, search, and analytics without being overwhelming. The count feels right for the domain.
Missing essential operations like listing products, reading product details, updating stores, or managing orders. Gaps hinder core workflows.
