Activate/Deactivate Variant Fulfilment at Locations

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description goes further, warning that deactivation discards the location's inventory and that Shopify refuses when committed stock or pending fulfilments exist. These are concrete behavioral consequences beyond what the structured fields convey.

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?

Front-loads the action, then uses tight bullet points for the two activate states, followed by location-matching rules and a highlighted destructive warning. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 destructive, multi-location mutation with no output schema, the description covers identification, matching rules, batching, side effects, and failure conditions. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly and safely.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: locations accept a GID or a name (e.g. "Melbourne Warehouse") matched case-insensitively, and multiple locations can be applied in one call. The activate flag semantics (starts at 0 available) also enrich the boolean beyond the schema text.

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?

States a specific verb+resource — turning location fulfilment ON/OFF for a variant — and specifies identification by SKU or variant GID. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like shopify_get_variant_locations (read) and shopify_set_inventory (stock levels), not fulfilment enablement.

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?

Explicitly sequences usage: use shopify_get_variant_locations to check can_deactivate first, then follow activation with shopify_set_inventory to set stock. It names the alternative tools and the conditions that select them, leaving nothing to inference.

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