Delete a product

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

Annotations already establish that this is destructive, and the description adds a useful non-obvious side effect: category references are cleaned up. It does not explicitly mention the confirmationToken or two-phase dry-run/apply behavior, but those are documented in the input schema and there is no contradiction with the annotations.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The action is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds a meaningful side effect without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

The schema and annotations carry much of the operational burden: destructive intent, dry-run mode, planDigest, confirmationToken, and output schema are all covered. The description supplements this with location scope and category cleanup, leaving only the missing tool-selection guidance as the main gap.

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 descriptions cover mode, planDigest, and confirmationToken (60% coverage), and the description does not repeat those details. It only weakly clarifies location-related context via 'from the location'; productId and locationId remain undocumented, though their names are fairly self-explanatory.

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 ('Remove') and resource ('a product') with a location scope, making it immediately clear what the tool does. It also distinguishes itself from siblings like delete_location and update_product by naming the exact target and action.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_product, set_product_availability, or delete_location. The dry-run/apply flow appears only in the schema, not as usage guidance in the description.

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