vaultix_create_product

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool creates a product, implying a write operation, but doesn't mention permission requirements, whether the operation is idempotent, error conditions, or what happens on success. The price unit clarification is helpful but insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 with just two sentences, both of which are relevant and front-loaded. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second provides crucial unit clarification. There's no wasted verbiage, though it could benefit from slightly more context.

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 a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens after creation (e.g., returns a product ID), error handling, or system behavior. The price unit clarification is helpful but doesn't compensate for the missing behavioral context needed for safe tool invocation.

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 5 parameters thoroughly. The description adds value by clarifying that 'price is in cents', which provides important semantic context beyond the schema's 'Price in cents' description. This earns a baseline score of 3 with some added value.

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 action ('Create a new product') and the resource ('in the catalog'), which is specific and unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from its sibling 'vaultix_update_product', which would require mentioning that this is for initial creation rather than modification.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'vaultix_update_product' or 'vaultix_get_product'. There's no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or when not to use it, leaving the agent with insufficient context for decision-making.

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