cor_create_product

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral transparency. It only says it creates a product but omits key details such as idempotency, duplicate handling, error behavior, or side effects. The mention of 'data' fields is weak context.

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 extremely concise at a single sentence plus a brief parameter note. Every part is functional with no wasted words, though it sacrifices detail for brevity.

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 creation tool with one complex parameter, the description lacks completeness. It does not cover prerequisites, duplicate behavior, required subfields, or return value details (despite having an output schema). The agent is left with significant uncertainty about how to invoke this tool correctly.

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%, so the description must add meaning. It lists example fields (name, description, rate) for the 'data' parameter, but uses vague 'etc.' and offers no structure, formatting, or constraints. The parameter is opaque, and the description does little to clarify its composition.

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 tool's action and target: 'Create a new product.' This verb+resource pattern distinguishes it from sibling tools like cor_create_client or cor_create_contract, which create different entities.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or special conditions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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