Create a new Shopify product by providing title, variants, images, tags, and status. Set pricing, inventory, vendor, and descriptions to add items to your store.
Create a new product.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tags | No | ||
| title | Yes | ||
| images | No | ||
| status | No | ||
| vendor | No | ||
| variants | No | ||
| body_html | No | ||
| product_type | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. 'Create a new product' reveals only the basic action, with no mention of side effects, defaults, required permissions, or whether the product is immediately published.
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 a single concise sentence with no redundancy. However, it is under-specified rather than efficiently informative; a good concise description would still mention key aspects like the required title field or default status.
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 create operation with no annotations, no output schema, and a rich 8-parameter input schema, this one-liner is severely incomplete. It provides no context about return behavior, defaults, or edge cases, leaving the agent unable to predict the outcome of invocation.
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 0%, yet the description names none of the 8 parameters. It leaves the agent to infer meaning solely from raw parameter names like 'tags', 'variants', and 'body_html', without any guidance on required fields, formats, or relationships.
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 direct verb ('Create') and a specific resource ('product'), making the core intent clear. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like shopify_update_product, relying on the name alone for disambiguation.
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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of typical scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions relative to shopify_list_products or shopify_update_product.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.