Preview Bulk Product Update

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond 'preview all changes,' which slightly clarifies the scope of the preview but doesn't disclose return format, pagination, or side effects. With annotations carrying most of the safety burden, this is a mid-level score.

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, front-loaded sentence that clearly states the tool's purpose. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or repetition of schema information.

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's simplicity, the annotations, and a fully documented schema, the description is mostly complete. It tells the agent this is a preview operation, which aligns with the plan-preview-execute pattern visible in sibling tools. However, it does not describe what the preview output will contain (though response_format indicates JSON/markdown) or any limitations, so it falls just short of a 5.

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%: both operation_id and response_format have descriptions. The tool description does not add meaning beyond the schema, but the schema already fully documents the parameters. Thus the baseline score of 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 uses a specific verb 'Preview' with a clear resource 'bulk product update operation.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like product_bulk_update_plan and product_bulk_update_execute by explicitly stating it's a preview step. The singular product_update_preview sibling is also differentiated by the 'bulk' qualifier.

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 the tool is used to preview changes before execution, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like product_bulk_update_execute or product_update_preview. The schema reference to 'Operation ID from product_bulk_update_plan' hints at the preceding step, but the description itself lacks explicit guidance on workflow sequencing.

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