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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, non-idempotency, and closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is largely provided structurally. The description adds useful constraints such as not accepting an organization id and the effect of customer_id, but it does not clarify what the destructive behavior means or whether an existing print profile could be overwritten.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, followed by the required-parameter instruction and two concise constraints. There is no wasted 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 mutating tool with no output schema, the description covers the purpose, required parameter selection, optional customer default, and the organization-id exclusion. It still omits the name parameter and does not address overwrite behavior or what the resulting print profile 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It explains template_id selection and that customer_id sets that customer's default, but it never mentions the optional name parameter, leaving one of three parameters without semantic guidance.

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 outcome: save a gallery shipping-mark template as a print profile in the organization. It is clear what the tool creates, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like create_label_from_template or copy_print_profile.

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?

It gives a concrete instruction for the required template_id: ask the user if they have not chosen one. It also notes that customer_id sets a customer default and that organization id is not accepted, but it does not explain when to use this tool versus alternatives such as print_shipping_mark or create_label_from_template.

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