Initiate a Stripe checkout to upgrade a store catalog from 50 to 500 items with the $19.99/mo Large Store Pass.
Prepare Stripe checkout payment intent to upgrade a store catalog from 50 to 500 items ($19.99/mo Large Store Pass).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| store_id | Yes | The ID or slug of the store to upgrade |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that this only 'prepares' a payment intent rather than charging, and that the upgrade is a recurring $19.99/mo subscription via Stripe. It omits what the caller must do with the intent (redirect URL? next step), whether the tier changes immediately, and any auth requirements.
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?
One sentence that front-loads the operation, then embeds the exact scope and price. No filler, no redundancy with the title or schema.
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 one-parameter tool this covers the essentials, but with no annotations and no output schema there is no structured place left to learn what the tool returns. The description should have said what the prepared intent gives back (e.g., a checkout URL to hand to the user) and what happens after payment succeeds.
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?
There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage ('The ID or slug of the store to upgrade'), so the schema already fully documents it. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, which matches the baseline 3 for high-coverage schemas.
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 ('Prepare Stripe checkout payment intent'), the exact resource ('store catalog from 50 to 500 items'), and the commercial terms ($19.99/mo Large Store Pass). This clearly separates it from the sibling checkout_store_fleet_tier (fleet-level upgrade vs. single-store catalog tier).
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?
Usage is implied by the name and description — call it when a store needs to move from the 50-item tier to the 500-item tier. However, it never states prerequisites (store ownership/auth, that the store must currently be on the lower tier) or explicitly routes the agent away from checkout_store_fleet_tier, which is the closest alternative.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.