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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds context beyond annotations by stating the tool is restricted to non-FREE businesses, requires a confirmation parameter, and mandates access checks. However, it doesn't explain the exact effect of publishing (e.g., making the product visible).

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 four sentences and each sentence adds essential guidance. It is front-loaded with the main action. Slightly verbose, but no wasted words. Could be shortened slightly without losing clarity.

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?

The description covers usage guidelines and preconditions well but lacks parameter explanations and does not describe the return value or side effects beyond being destructive. Given the tool has 3 parameters and no output schema, more detail would improve completeness.

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 compensate. It adds meaning for one parameter ('confirm' must be 'PUBLISH') but does not explain 'zeroLinkId' or 'communityId'. Without more detail, agents may not know what values to provide for these required parameters.

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 'Publish a Zero Link product' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like publish_physical_product and unpublish_zero_link by naming the exact resource type.

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 explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance: requires confirm set to 'PUBLISH', FREE businesses cannot use, must call check_business_tool_access before collecting inputs, and must show grace-period warnings. It also details preconditions and actions to take if access is blocked.

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