Shopify / Wix Product Visibility Toggle

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it explains the workflow position, mentions that it returns specific fields (job_id, status, visibility_mode), and the input schema description provides risk warnings about 'sell_immediately' mode. While annotations cover idempotency and non-destructive nature, the description adds practical workflow context that helps the agent understand when and why to use this tool.

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?

Extremely efficient three-sentence structure: first states purpose, second provides usage guidelines, third specifies return values. Every sentence earns its place with critical information, and it's front-loaded with the most important context (when to use it in the workflow).

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 tool with good annotations and full schema coverage, the description provides excellent workflow context and return value information. The only minor gap is that without an output schema, the description could provide more detail about the return format, but it does list the specific fields returned, which is helpful. It adequately covers the tool's role in the broader workflow.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already fully documents both parameters. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema descriptions. It mentions the parameters indirectly through the return values but doesn't provide additional semantic context about how they should be used.

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 specific action ('Change the visibility mode'), target resource ('a prepared job'), and distinguishes it from siblings by explicitly mentioning when to call it ('between dsers_product_import and dsers_store_push'). It goes beyond the title's generic 'toggle' to specify the actual modes (draft vs published).

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool ('Call this between dsers_product_import and dsers_store_push') and names the specific sibling tools it works with. It also implies when not to use it (outside that workflow) and provides clear sequencing guidance that helps distinguish it from other product-related tools.

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