Publish an image onto a Shopify product

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

This description goes well beyond the annotations by explaining the asynchronous Shopify fetch-and-process behavior, explicitly warning that a PROCESSING status is success rather than failure, and noting the account-installation prerequisite. These are non-obvious behavioral traits that an agent could easily misinterpret without this 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?

Every sentence earns its place: purpose, required parameters, asynchronous success semantics, and a hard prerequisite. The most important operational warning (PROCESSING means success) is front-and-center, and the description stays compact despite covering a lot of useful ground.

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 schema already documents alt, imageUrl, and productId, the description supplies all missing contextual essentials: where to get productId, what imageUrl should point to, the async outcome to expect, the account restriction, and cost behavior. No output schema exists, but the description effectively tells the agent what success looks like after 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real value by clarifying that productId must take the gid://shopify/Product/... form and come from list_shopify_products, and by emphasizing that imageUrl must be public and is typically a Hermoso render. This reinforces and extends the schema descriptions without repeating them verbatim.

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 uses a specific verb ('Attach') and names the exact resource ('one of the merchant's Shopify product listings, as product media'), so the core purpose is unmistakable. However, it never directly differentiates itself from the sibling set_product_image, leaving the agent to infer the distinction between publishing onto Shopify and setting a product image elsewhere.

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 provides clear operational guidance: use productId from list_shopify_products, use a PUBLIC https imageUrl, and only attempt this for accounts installed via the Shopify App Store. It does not explicitly contrast this tool with alternatives or say when not to use it, so it misses the 'when-not' element, but the context provided is strong.

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