product_predict

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses routing under JWT/tenant/company scope, providing some behavioral context. However, it does not state whether the action is read-only or has side effects, nor does it mention rate limits, performance, or error 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 extremely concise (5 lines) with a clear front-loaded purpose and a well-structured Args section. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.

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 simplicity (2 params, both optional) and presence of an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks explanation of return values, error conditions, or when the tool is appropriate versus siblings. The output schema exists but is not described, so the agent must infer structure from elsewhere.

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, adding meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not specify allowed JSON structure, examples, or constraints, leaving moderate ambiguity.

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 states it runs a 'product domain agent action predict' and mentions routing under JWT/tenant/company scope, giving a clear verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like commerce_predict or specify what kind of prediction (e.g., demand, forecasting), limiting perfect clarity.

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 or when not to use it. The description only describes the mechanism, not usage context. Sibling tools like commerce_predict suggest related but distinct use cases, yet no differentiation is provided.

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