Swagger: Update Portal Product

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

Although annotations already signal idempotent and destructive behavior, the description adds meaningful side-effect context: changing the slug affects product URLs, public/hidden control visibility versus navigation display, and name changes affect user-facing listings. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 opening sentence is concise and front-loaded, and the 'Toolset' heading groups context. However, the parameter section duplicates schema descriptions nearly verbatim, adding unnecessary length beyond what the structured schema already provides.

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?

For an update tool with one required parameter and six well-documented fields, the description plus schema covers the necessary inputs and key effects. The output schema is present so return-value details need not be in the description; only permissions/preconditions are not addressed, which is a minor gap.

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%, and the description repeats the schema's parameter descriptions rather than adding new meaning. The bullet list is readable, but it does not compensate for anything missing in the schema, so it earns the baseline.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Update a product's settings within a specific portal.' The scope ('within a specific portal') and the title distinguish it from related siblings such as swagger_update_portal, swagger_create_portal_product, and swagger_delete_portal_product.

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 clearly signals its use case: updating an existing product's configuration in a portal. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, so it falls short of full guidance, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it over create/delete/get siblings.

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