upload_catalog[demo: deshabilitada] Bulk-creates products in the business catalog from a structured list (up to 50 items).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| products | Yes | List of products to create (1–50 items). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark this as non-readonly and destructive; description adds the 50-item limit and structured-list requirement. It does not explain failure modes, idempotency implications, or effects on existing catalog data. The '[demo: deshabilitada]' prefix hints at availability issues but is cryptic and in Spanish.
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?
Single-sentence description is front-loaded and concise. The bracketed '[demo: deshabilitada]' note is extra noise that may confuse agents, but it does not significantly bloat the text.
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 one-parameter tool without output schema, the description covers the core purpose and input constraints. It omits return value information, error/partial-failure behavior, and clarification of the demo-disabled flag, leaving some operational ambiguity.
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 already provides 100% coverage, describing the 'products' parameter as a list of 1–50 items with name and price. Description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema, such as 'business catalog' context and bulk creation intent.
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?
Description clearly states the verb ('Bulk-creates'), resource ('products in the business catalog'), and input ('structured list') with a specific limit ('up to 50 items'). It distinguishes itself from sibling 'create_product' by emphasizing bulk batch creation.
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 bulk creation context is evident from the description, implying it should be used for multi-item catalog uploads rather than single product creation. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it.
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.
Multiple tools have overlapping purposes, such as caja_registrar_movimiento vs register_movement, get_payment_intent_status vs open_cobro_status, and adjust_stock vs stock_load. The distinctions are not immediately clear from names/descriptions, causing a high risk of misselection.
Naming is inconsistent: mixes English and Spanish (caja_*, emit_invoice, send_whatsapp_*), and uses different patterns (open_*, get_*, query_*, list_*, etc.). Some names like stock_load and bulk_price_update don't follow a clear verb_noun convention.
50 tools is excessive for most contexts, even for a broad ERP-like domain. Many are UI widgets (open_*) that add clutter and could be consolidated, making the tool set feel heavy and harder to navigate.
The tool set covers many core business functions (products, suppliers, customers, sales, invoicing, shipping, cash register, payments, integrations). However, there are noticeable gaps: purchase requests have only create (no list/update/delete), shipments cannot be updated/cancelled, and sales lack direct update/query by ID.