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

The description reveals important behavioral consequences beyond the annotations: the product becomes instantly purchasable by humans and AI agents over x402, and it is a live sellable entity. It also alerts the agent to confirm name/price with the user. This goes beyond the simple 'create' semantics and the false read-only/destructive flags.

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?

Two concise sentences with no fluff. The main action is front-loaded and the key behavioral consequence and user-confirmation requirement are included without repeating schema content.

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 create operation with six parameters, the description covers the essential context: what is created, where, what happens immediately, and the user-confirmation step. There is no output schema, so return-format details are not expected; the schema already handles parameter-level documentation.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minimal new parameter detail beyond mentioning name and price, but the schema already documents all fields including defaults and constraints.

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 clearly states the verb 'Create', the object 'sellable product', and the target 'on the linked account's SmartSite'. This distinguishes it from read-only siblings like swop_get_store and the mutation sibling swop_update_my_smartsite.

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 description gives clear context for when to use the tool: when the user wants a new sellable product on their SmartSite. It adds a key usage instruction—confirm name and price with the user before creating. It does not explicitly list when not to use it, but no competing create-product sibling exists.

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