commerce_margin_analysis

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It fails to indicate whether margin_analysis is read-only, modifies data, or has side effects. The routing detail is technical but not about tool behavior.

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 short but includes routing details that could be implied. It is front-loaded with the action name but does not fully earn its space; essential information about the tool's purpose is missing.

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?

Despite an output schema (not shown), the description omits what margin_analysis actually does, its inputs' expected use, and the nature of the output. It is incomplete for an agent to decide when and how to invoke this tool.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains 'message' as a free-text objective and 'inputs' as an optional JSON string of structured inputs. This adds basic meaning but lacks format, constraints, or examples.

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 'Run' and the resource 'commerce domain agent action margin_analysis.' It identifies the specific action but does not differentiate it from numerous sibling commerce tools like commerce_assortment_gap_analysis or commerce_price_optimization_run.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only explains the routing mechanism under JWT/tenant/scope, not the conditions or context for selecting margin_analysis over other commerce actions.

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