add_product_images

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully bears the burden of disclosure. It clearly states side effects: images are appended, become immediately visible, require publicly accessible URLs, and are subject to store plan limits. This provides comprehensive behavioral context.

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 well-structured with sections for purpose, API call, return structure, and side effects. It is efficient but could be slightly more concise; however, the structure aids readability.

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?

The description is thorough: it explains the return structure (dict with success, resource_id, message, images) despite no output schema, covers side effects, and constraints. For a tool with two parameters and straightforward behavior, it provides complete 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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds value by clarifying that image_urls must be publicly accessible and that images are appended to existing ones, enhancing understanding beyond the schema.

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 tool's purpose with a [WRITE] tag and explicit Chinese explanation '為商品新增圖片' (add images to product), and specifies that it uploads image URLs to the product album, appending them. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_product_images.

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 includes a '用途' (usage) section stating it is suitable for adding product display images and context images. It provides the specific API endpoint but does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare to alternatives like delete_product_images.

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