printful_create_mockup_task

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (mutation), openWorldHint=true (non-deterministic), idempotentHint=false (not repeatable), and destructiveHint=false (safe). The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by specifying that it creates an async task (explaining non-deterministic behavior) and returns a task ID for status checking, which clarifies the workflow. It does not contradict 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 core purpose ('Generate product mockup images') and efficiently explains the async task creation and return value in two clear sentences. Every sentence adds essential information without redundancy or fluff.

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 (async mutation with multiple parameters), the description is complete: it states the purpose, behavioral context (async task), and output (task ID). With annotations covering safety and determinism, and an output schema presumably detailing the return structure, no additional explanation of return values is needed.

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 0%, but the input schema has detailed descriptions for all parameters (e.g., 'Catalog product ID', 'URL to design image file'). The description does not add any parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline of 3 given the schema's comprehensive coverage.

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 specific action ('Generate product mockup images') and resource ('mockup images showing your design on the product'), distinguishing it from siblings like printful_get_mockup_task (which retrieves task status) and printful_get_product (which fetches product details). It explicitly mentions the async task creation and return of a task ID.

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 usage by stating it 'creates an async task to generate mockup images' and mentions checking status with the returned task ID, but it does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., vs. other mockup-related tools or design upload tools). No exclusions or prerequisites are provided.

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