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

Annotations only declare destructiveHint=true, leaving the description to disclose mutation behavior. It hints at duplicate-rejection via 'ProductCode must be unique', but says nothing about required permissions, error behavior, or what happens to unspecified fields. With thin annotation coverage and no output schema, the description carries most of the burden and mostly abstains.

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 fragments, front-loaded with the core action before constraints and endpoint. No filler, though the endpoint note is arguably redundant to an MCP agent.

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 an 11-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and only a destructiveHint annotation, the description is minimal: it omits which fields are required, what the response contains, and any error/auth context. Adequate only because the schema fully documents the parameters.

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 coverage is 100%, so all 11 parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds only the uniqueness constraint on productCode, which the schema itself does not state — a small but genuine increment over structured data, matching the baseline 3.

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 verb and resource ('Create a new product') that clearly separates it from sibling creation tools like unleashed_create_customer and unleashed_create_sales_order. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the resource noun alone disambiguates.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus other create tools, nor on prerequisites such as whether the product's group/supplier must already exist. The uniqueness note on ProductCode is a constraint, not usage routing.

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