add_inventory_product_comment

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

Annotations indicate it is not read-only and not destructive, which is consistent. The description adds that the comment supports Markdown and the product resolution method, but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as idempotency, whether multiple comments per product are allowed, or any side effects.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff. Essential information is front-loaded: action, target, resolution method, and optional disambiguation.

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?

Given the parameters are well-described in the schema and an output schema exists, the description provides sufficient context for a simple add-comment operation. Lacks minor details like whether duplicate comments are allowed or error handling, but overall adequate.

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% and the description mostly restates schema info (Markdown in body, disambiguation for category). It adds the word 'directly' but does not provide significant additional meaning beyond what is already in the input 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 clearly states the action (add a Markdown comment), the target (inventory product), and the identification method (by ID or exact name, with optional category for disambiguation). It distinguishes from sibling 'add_comment' tools by being specific to inventory products.

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?

Provides guidance on when to use the 'category' parameter (to disambiguate duplicate names), but does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or compare it to alternatives like 'add_comment' or 'add_drive_file_comment'.

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