upsert_product

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose critical behavior: legacy immediate write, high risk, and bypassing INFLOW_ENABLE_SAFE_WRITES. It does not cover auth requirements, return behavior, or full mutation side effects, but the key risk context is present.

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 warning and alternative are front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by the create/update rule. It is short, direct, and every sentence earns its place.

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 complex 15-parameter mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the essential selection context: deprecation, risk, and the preferred alternative. Output behavior and deeper side effects are not described, but the schema is fully documented and the main decision context is present.

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 15 parameters, including that ID and timestamp are required for updates. The description adds only the create-vs-update distinction, which is also implied by the schema's ID description, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb and resource: create or update a product. It also distinguishes this tool from set_product by explicitly recommending the alternative, so an agent can route correctly without opening another schema.

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?

It gives explicit guidance: use set_product instead, and this legacy tool is high-risk immediate write that bypasses safe writes. The condition for avoiding it is unmistakable.

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