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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false; the description reinforces this with "opens nothing by itself" and explains the return shape (screens, buttons, fields). That is real added context beyond the annotations, though the leading "Update product..." phrasing briefly implies a mutation an agent must read past.

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?

Reasonably short, but the front-loaded sentence describes an action the tool does not perform, pushing the essential clarification ("returns how to do it... opens nothing by itself") into second position. The trailing "WooCommerce's official API: Yes." is boilerplate that adds little for an agent choosing a tool.

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?

With no output schema and an empty parameter schema, the description carries the burden of explaining the return value, which it does only at a high level (step-by-step screens/buttons/fields). It is adequate for calling the tool but leaves open how product identity is supplied and what the returned payload looks like.

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?

There are zero parameters (empty object, additionalProperties=false), so the baseline is 4. The description does not explain how the tool knows which product to describe steps for, which is a noticeable omission for a tool named update_product, but no parameter semantics are needed or missing.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("Update product in the user's own WooCommerce account") and then clarifies the actual mechanism: "Returns how to do it in WooCommerce step by step (screens, buttons, fields)." The opening clause is misleading on its own — it reads like the tool performs the mutation — but the second sentence corrects it and routes to cotlet_browser_* for the real action.

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 says to use the cotlet_browser_* tools to actually carry out the update after getting the steps, which is the key routing decision for this tool. It does not name when-not-to-use cases (e.g. when the user has API access, or how this differs from cotlet_app_guide), so it stops short of a full when/when-not/alternative matrix.

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