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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false), so the bar is lower, yet the description adds the non-obvious two-phase workflow — this call is a no-op preview and the real change requires merchant confirmation on a link. The only slight tension is that 'changes nothing' reads as read-only while readOnlyHint=false, but the preview/link generation plausibly accounts for that flag.

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 core content is front-loaded and tight, but the sentence 'Money is integer minor units (cents)' is a non-sequitur — there is no monetary parameter — and it introduces confusion rather than value. Removing it would make the description notably cleaner.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, annotations present, and rich schema text, the description covers the essential behavior: multi-mode operation and the preview/confirmation flow. The stray money reference is the main completeness/structure flaw, and prerequisites like 'go live first' live only in the schema.

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%, so the single 'password' parameter (length, character set, case-folding, null-removes) is already fully documented in the schema. The description adds nothing about the parameter — the 'Money is integer minor units (cents)' sentence refers to no existing parameter and is irrelevant here.

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 resource (the shop's storefront password) and the three modes of operation — set, change, remove — in one vivid sentence. It is unmistakably distinct from siblings like customers_reset_password, which targets customer accounts rather than the storefront gate.

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?

Gives clear operational context: the call produces a preview plus a confirmation link, and only the merchant on that page can effect the change. It does not explicitly say when NOT to use it or name alternatives, but no competing sibling exists for this resource, so the practical guidance is adequate.

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