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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only adds the note 'Browser-based tool', which hints at UI interaction, but does not explain output format, whether it opens a page, or any limitations. This is insufficient for full behavioral transparency.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action (generate SKU codes) and includes all key inputs, plus the browser-based note. No wasted words or redundancy.

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 0-param tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core purpose, inputs, and the critical 'browser-based' nature. It lacks details about the output format, but the context is simple enough that this is adequate.

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?

The input schema is empty (0 params), but the description lists four conceptual inputs (product name, category, size, color) and clarifies the tool is browser-based. This adds essential meaning beyond the schema, explaining that these are UI inputs rather than API parameters.

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 tool generates SKU codes from specific inputs (product name, category, size, color), using a specific verb (自動生成). This distinguishes it from sibling generators like barcode-generator or product-description-generator.

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?

Usage context is implied: use when you need to generate SKU codes from product attributes. However, there is no explicit comparison to alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance, leaving room for ambiguity.

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