products_update_store_status

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

Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive intent (destructiveHint=false). The description simply restates the action without disclosing side effects, prerequisites, or what happens to the product's store status. It adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide.

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?

It is a single concise sentence, but it is extremely terse and lacks any formatting or structure to separate purpose from context. While efficient, it fails to convey useful information beyond the verb and resource.

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?

With 5 parameters, 2 enums, and no output schema, the description is severely lacking. It does not explain the purpose of the storeId, productIds, or how 'include/exclude' affects the store. The tool is under-specified for an agent to use correctly.

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?

All parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions; it merely echoes the action in the 'action' parameter. No additional value is provided.

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 the core action (include/exclude) and the resource (product in store), but it lacks specificity about what 'store status' means and does not clearly differentiate from other product tools. The verb and resource are present, but the purpose is partially vague.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not explain conditions for include vs exclude, any dependencies, or what distinguishes it from other product management tools. There is zero contextual usage information.

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