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

Annotations only say readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true; the description goes much further by disclosing the write gating on confirm, the dry-run listing returned under requiresConfirmation, the confirmWith pass-through arguments, the draft refusal, and the owner-only permission requirement. It discloses what changes and what does not on each call.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then modes, then confirmation flow, then defaults and constraints. Sentences are dense with em-dash asides; every clause carries substance, though the single long middle sentence could be split for readability.

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?

Despite an output schema existing, the description explains the key return shapes (page listing, requiresConfirmation, confirmWith), which the agent needs to drive the confirmation loop. Combined with the mutation gating and permission notes, nothing essential is missing for a 6-parameter write tool.

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?

Even with 100% schema coverage, the description adds meaning the schema lacks: width/height defaults (100% and 800), that pageId must come from the listing, that newPageTitle creates a page, and the exact semantics of confirm plus the returned confirmWith. This is real added value beyond field descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Put a published catalog on a page of the merchant's own Shopify or WooCommerce store') and anchors it to a known surface ('as the Publish dialog's store tab does'). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like publish_catalog and open_publish_settings, which do not touch store pages.

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?

Explicitly defines the three mode branches: catalogId alone lists pages, pageId or newPageTitle performs an embed, and confirm: true is required to actually mutate the store. It also states exclusions ('A draft is refused') and the owner-only restriction, leaving nothing to inference.

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