Preview Product Creation

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by confirming the preview behavior ('Shows exactly what will be created') and the required sequencing, which goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 primary purpose and followed by a critical usage constraint. No wasted words; every sentence earns its place.

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?

With only two parameters and no output schema, the description conveys the key operational context: it is a non-destructive preview that must precede execution. It stops short of describing the output format, but the response_format parameter already hints at json/markdown options, making this sufficient for the tool's complexity.

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%, with operation_id and response_format both documented meaningfully. The description does not add parameter-level detail, but the schema already provides sufficient semantic meaning, so a 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 clearly identifies the tool's function: 'Preview a planned product creation' with the specific verb 'Preview' and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like product_create_execute by stating it shows what will be created rather than performing the action.

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 instruction 'Must be called before execution' provides explicit when-to-use guidance within the plan-preview-execute workflow. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use, but the context is clear from the sibling tool names.

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