Create batch catalog elements by specifying target catalog ID and a list of item names. Include custom fields like price or description for each element.
Cria novos elementos (ex: produtos) em lote dentro de um catálogo específico.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| elements | Yes | Lista de elementos a serem criados | |
| catalog_id | Yes | ID do catálogo destino | |
| client_slug | Yes | Identificador do cliente (slug) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it does state the core side effect (batch creation) and target catalog. However, it does not disclose error/partial-failure behavior, duplicate handling, or response format, which would add useful transparency.
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?
A single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and includes the batch and catalog qualifiers. No redundant words.
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 low-complexity create tool with three well-described required parameters, the description plus schema is nearly sufficient. It lacks explicit output/return expectations and a note about what happens after creation, but those are not critical for selecting the tool.
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 three parameters. The description adds only a small amount of context ('em lote', 'ex: produtos') without going deeper than 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 uses a specific verb ('Cria novos elementos') and names the resource, the batch mode, and the destination catalog. This clearly distinguishes it from the read/update siblings (get_catalog_elements, update_catalog_elements).
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 establishes when to use the tool: to create new catalog elements in bulk. It does not explicitly name the alternative update tool as a 'when not to use' case, but the word 'novos' makes the creation-vs-update boundary clear enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.