Patch In App Product

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It usefully discloses that this is a partial update and that the operation is disabled in read-only mode. However, it does not describe permissions, side effects, failure modes, or what happens to omitted fields.

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 two short sentences with no filler: the first states the purpose, the second states the read-only restriction. Every word earns its place, and the structure is easy to scan.

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 output schema exists and the three required parameters are fully described in the schema, the description is largely sufficient for basic invocation. The main completeness gap is the lack of usage differentiation from update_in_app_product, but the word 'partially' and the read-only warning cover the most important context.

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 package_name, sku, and product are already documented in the input schema. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond reinforcing that product is the partial body with fields to change.

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 a specific action ('Partially update') and resource ('existing in-app product'), which clearly identifies what the tool does. The word 'partially' implicitly distinguishes it from the full-update sibling update_in_app_product, though it never names that sibling or the create/delete alternatives.

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?

There is no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus update_in_app_product, create_in_app_product, or delete_in_app_product. The phrase 'Partially update an existing in-app product' implies use for partial edits, but no alternatives, exclusions, or contextual conditions are given.

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