delete-product-variants

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Delete' signals a destructive mutation, but it doesn't state irreversibility, what happens to associated inventory levels or order history, whether partial failures are possible with multiple variantIds, or permission requirements.

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 wasted words. The scope ('one or more') and the resource are stated immediately.

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 an un-annotated destructive bulk-delete operation with no output schema, the description is far too thin – it doesn't cover side effects, idempotency, failure semantics for multiple IDs, or what a successful response returns.

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% – productId and variantIds are both documented as Shopify GIDs, and required/minItems constraints are declared. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('one or more variants from a product'), which is unambiguous. It doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like manage-product-variants or delete-product, but the operation itself is clear.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus manage-product-variants (which likely also handles variant removal) or delete-product, nor any stated prerequisites such as product ownership or permissions. The agent is left to infer the context entirely.

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