Plan Product Creation

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

The description adds important behavioral context beyond the annotations: it explicitly states 'No changes are made until execution,' clarifying that this is a staging step despite readOnlyHint being false. This helps the agent understand the tool's side-effect profile and workflow.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the purpose. Every sentence earns its place by explaining the staged operation and the critical 'no changes until execution' behavior, with no waste.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description conveys the essential workflow: the tool creates a staged operation requiring preview then execution. It doesn't detail how the plan is returned or referenced, but the sibling tool names (e.g., product_create_preview, operation_list) fill that contextual gap, making it adequately complete for a planning step.

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 for all 9 parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter details. Baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description adds no extra semantic value but the schema already documents each parameter clearly.

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's function: 'Plan a new product creation' with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explaining that it creates a staged operation that must be previewed and then executed, setting it apart from direct create/preview/execute tools.

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 provides clear workflow guidance: this tool is used to plan, then must be previewed and executed. It implies the proper sequence without explicitly naming alternatives, but the context is sufficient for an agent to know when to use this tool versus actual creation or execution.

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