Create a single catalog item in Braze by providing the catalog name, item ID, and item data fields.
Create a single catalog item.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| apiKey | No | Braze REST API key | |
| item_id | Yes | Item ID | |
| item_data | Yes | Item data fields | |
| catalog_name | Yes | Catalog name | |
| restEndpoint | No | Braze REST endpoint URL |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not disclose whether creation is idempotent or upserts on an existing item_id, what happens on a duplicate ID, what permissions/API key scope are needed, or how many requests/rate limits apply. Only the bare fact of mutation is conveyed.
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 front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is efficient. It is arguably too terse for a five-parameter mutation tool with a nested payload, but nothing in it is wasted.
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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and a free-form nested item_data object, the description should cover at least auth prerequisites, the batch-vs-single choice, and what is returned on success. None of that is present.
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 parameters are documented in the schema and a baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, and notably says nothing about the structure of the free-form item_data object or the required catalog_name/item_id pairing.
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 (Create) and resource (catalog item), and the qualifier 'a single' hints at scope versus a bulk operation. However, it never names the competing sibling catalog_items_create, so the distinction between single-item and batch creation must be inferred.
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?
No indication of when to use this tool rather than catalog_items_create (bulk), catalog_item_update, or catalog_item_edit. No prerequisites are mentioned, even though the schema requires an apiKey and restEndpoint.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.