Reactivate Product

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

Annotations provide idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., permissions, side effects like restoring availability). It merely restates the name, adding no value beyond annotations.

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 a single concise sentence with no excess words. It is front-loaded and to the point. Could potentially add more context without losing conciseness, but as is, it is efficient.

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 simple tool with one required parameter, the description provides the basic action. However, it lacks context about the result (no output schema) or edge cases (e.g., if product is already active). The annotations cover idempotency but not other aspects. Adequate but minimal.

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% for the single parameter 'id', which is well-defined in the schema. The description does not elaborate on the parameter, but the schema already provides sufficient details (type, description, constraints). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Reactivate a deactivated product') and the resource (product). It is a specific verb+resource pair. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling 'reactivate_client', though the tool name already specifies the resource.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'deactivate_product' or 'reactivate_client'. No prerequisites (e.g., product must be deactivated) or exclusions are mentioned.

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