billy_create_product

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears full burden. It states the mutation nature ('WRITE') and the confirm requirement, but does not describe side effects, idempotency, error behavior, or response format. The provided shape helps but additional behavioral context is missing.

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?

Two concise, front-loaded sentences. No filler. Every sentence contributes: purpose, nature, confirm requirement, and payload shape.

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 covers purpose and payload shape, but omits return value (no output schema), prerequisites, or behavior for duplicate creation. For a mutation tool with nested parameters, more completeness would be beneficial.

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 schema describes only the confirm parameter; the product parameter lacks schema description. The description compensates by providing a detailed shape for the product object, including fields like name, prices, and optional fields. This adds significant semantic value beyond the schema.

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 'Create a product/service', which matches the tool name and distinguishes it from siblings like billy_update_product and billy_delete_product. The verb and resource are explicit.

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 specifies it is a WRITE operation requiring confirm:true, guiding the agent to use a two-step call pattern. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives (e.g., when to use update vs create), but the intent is clear from the context.

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