ecommerce_createCustomSalesChannelV1

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions syncing capabilities but omits important details such as idempotency, uniqueness constraints, required permissions, or what happens upon creation (e.g., whether it modifies existing channels). The description is too sparse to provide adequate behavioral transparency for a creation operation.

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 concise with only two sentences. The first sentence clearly states the tool's main function, and the second sentence provides context on the benefit (syncing). There is no redundant or extraneous information, and it is front-loaded with the primary action.

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 tool has no output schema and no annotations, the description should cover key aspects like return format, prerequisites (store must exist), error handling, and the fact that only 'custom' type is allowed. The current description covers the core use case but lacks these details, making it adequate but not fully complete for a creation tool.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 4 parameters. The description adds little beyond the schema, only reinforcing the purpose (e.g., 'url' as 'optional public address'). Since schema coverage is high, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate; the description does not introduce new semantic value.

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 creates a custom sales channel for a store, using the specific verb 'Create' and the resource 'custom sales channel'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ecommerce_updateSalesChannelV1 and ecommerce_listSalesChannelsV1 by focusing on creation and the ability to build your own frontend, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies usage when building a custom frontend and syncing catalog/orders/shipping/payments, but it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like ecommerce_updateSalesChannelV1 for modifications. Guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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