create_product

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, covering basic safety. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it explains that image URLs must be publicly accessible HTTPS, Paddle doesn't upload images to a CDN, tax category selection impacts tax rates, and the response includes a copy of the new product entity. It also warns about tax category review for the 'standard' category. No contradiction with annotations.

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 front-loaded with the tool's purpose, but it includes extensive tax category explanations and general usage warnings that could be streamlined. While informative, some sentences (e.g., the detailed tax category list) are lengthy, and the final paragraph about not fabricating details is generic rather than tool-specific, reducing efficiency.

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's complexity (6 parameters, 2 required, nested objects) and lack of output schema, the description is mostly complete. It covers key behavioral aspects like image hosting, tax category implications, and response format. However, it could better address error handling or specific constraints for parameters like customData to fully compensate for the missing output schema.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds meaning for taxCategory by listing and explaining each enum value in detail, and for imageUrl by specifying HTTPS requirements and image ratio recommendations. However, it does not provide additional context for other parameters like name, description, type, or customData beyond what the schema offers.

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 tool's purpose: 'create a new product in Paddle' with the specific verb 'create' and resource 'product'. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on product creation rather than other entities like addresses, adjustments, or customers, and explains that 'Product entities describe the items that customers can purchase'.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool: for creating products that work with prices and require tax categories. It includes guidance on prerequisites ('Ensure you have all the information needed before making the call') and post-creation steps ('Once a product has been created, relate it to a price'). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name specific alternatives among siblings.

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