Update WooCommerce Product

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

The description adds the behavioral trait 'Only the fields you pass are changed', which goes beyond the annotations. This clarifies that it performs a partial update, which is important for an idempotent mutation tool. With annotations covering the safety profile (not read-only, not destructive, idempotent), the description provides meaningful additional context about how the update behaves.

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 description is a single focused sentence that states the core purpose and key behavior. Every word is meaningful, and it is appropriately front-loaded with the action and resource. There is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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?

Given the tool has 11 parameters, no output schema, and no explanations of return values or error behavior, the description is sparse. It covers the primary purpose and partial-update semantics but omits details about what the response looks like, permission requirements, or how missing/invalid fields are handled. The description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior without additional inference.

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 low at 36%, and the description does not compensate by explaining the individual fields. It only mentions the general concept of 'fields you pass', but does not list or describe any of the updatable parameters. This leaves several params (e.g., sku, virtual, stock_quantity) without any semantic explanation beyond their types.

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 'Update' and the resource 'existing WooCommerce product by ID', which distinguishes it from create/list tools. The phrase 'by ID' specifies the scope, and mentioning 'existing product' differentiates it from wc_create_product. This is specific and unambiguous.

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 implies the tool is for modifying an existing product, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or when not to use it. For example, there is no mention that wc_create_product should be used for new products. The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions or alternative guidance.

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