create_item

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no behavioral context. It does not mention required scopes, side effects, or validation rules, even though fields like is_stock require stock_edit scope.

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?

The phrase 'Create item' is short but under-specified rather than concise. For a complex 32-parameter mutation tool, this is not appropriately sized and does not earn its place.

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?

The description is severely incomplete for a complex tool with 32 parameters, no output schema, and a large sibling toolset. It omits purpose, prerequisites, return behavior, and any operational context.

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?

With 32 parameters and only 41% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for undocumented fields, but it provides zero parameter semantics. It does not explain any of the key fields like width, height, article_type_id, or stock-related properties.

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 'Create item' is a direct tautology of the tool name and title, providing no additional meaning. It does not distinguish this tool from siblings like create_item_position or other create_* tools.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_item or create_item_position. The description lacks any context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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