Plan Product Publish

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

The annotations indicate non-read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the crucial staged behavior—planning does not execute directly and requires a preview step—which goes beyond what annotations convey.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and each sentence adds value (purpose, ID source, workflow requirement). No wasted words.

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 simplicity of a planning tool with four well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the tool's role in the broader publish workflow. It could mention no further prerequisites or outputs, but it is functionally complete.

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%, and the schema already documents all parameters, including the fact that publication_ids come from publication_list. The description provides no additional parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already states.

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 action (plan) and the resource (publishing products to sales channels). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like product_publish_preview and product_publish_execute by explicitly naming the planning phase.

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?

It explicitly directs users to publication_list for channel IDs and explains the staged workflow ('must be previewed then executed'). It lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives, but the workflow context is clear.

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